"You know, there is a narrative that the Supreme Court is corrupt. I mean, we saw that emerge in the wake of the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, and now we see it that they're in the tank for Trump. Not only is that narrative overreported, it is patently false, and it is dangerous for the institution, and the public's faith and confidence in the rule of law."
"This is a conservative Supreme Court. It has been a conservative Supreme Court for 20 years. People can disagree and do disagree with their opinions, but it's profoundly wrong to call it- or say corruption where there, in fact, is none. What's underreported is any understanding of what this court's been doing for the past 20 years: its views of its role vis-a-vis the other branches, how it sees the law, how it's trying in its focus to restore some kind of accountability"
Accusations that the Supreme Court is corrupt are overreported, patently false, and dangerous to the institution and the public's confidence in the rule of law. The Court has been conservatively aligned for roughly twenty years, and profound disagreement with its opinions does not constitute corruption. The nine justices do not interpret the Constitution identically and are engaged in a legitimate struggle over methods of constitutional and federal-law interpretation. The Court has been focused on restoring accountability within the constitutional structure and defining its role vis-a-vis the other branches. Excessive rhetoric alleging corruption undermines public trust, invites threats, and endangers democratic stability.
Read at www.mediaite.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]