For months now, various Democrats and their media allies have repeatedly been trying to delegitimize the U.S. Supreme Court openly on television and social media.
There are no coincidences. This is part of a political strategy. If the court is seen as illegitimate, rulings by the court which are disliked by Democrats and members of their progressive base can be ignored.
Does that sound completely crazy? It’s already happening.
Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet and a political scientist from the San Francisco State University named Aaron Belkin recently penned an open letter to Joe Biden urging him to embrace “Popular Constitutionalism.”
They published it at the Balkinization Blog:
An Open Letter to the Biden Administration on Popular ConstitutionalismAaron Belkin and I have written the following open letter to the Biden administration urging that it endorse and take steps to implement popular constitutionalism as a response to what the President has described as “not a normal” Supreme Court. We urge readers to let the administration know in their own ways that reinvigorating the long and honored tradition of popular constitutionalism is both viable and urgently needed in today’s circumstances.
Here’s part of their letter:
We urge President Biden to restrain MAGA justices immediately by announcing that if and when they issue rulings that are based on gravely mistaken interpretations of the Constitution that undermine our most fundamental commitments, the Administration will be guided by its own constitutional interpretations.We have worked diligently over the past five years to advocate Supreme Court expansion as a necessary strategy for restoring democracy. Although we continue to support expansion, the threat that MAGA justices pose is so extreme that reforms that do not require Congressional approval are needed at this time, and advocates and experts should encourage President Biden to take immediate action to limit the damage.The central tenet of the solution that we recommend—Popular Constitutionalism—is that courts do not exercise exclusive authority over constitutional meaning. In practice, a President who disagrees with a court’s interpretation of the Constitution should offer and then follow an alternative interpretation. If voters disagree with the President’s interpretation, they can express their views at the ballot box.
You should read the whole thing.
Professor Jonathan Turley wrote about this at The Hill:
Tyranny of the minority: Liberal law profs urge Biden to defy the courts and the public“I shall resist any illegal federal court order.”When “the Court’s interpretation of the Constitution is egregiously wrong,” the president should refuse to follow it.Those two statements were made roughly 60 years apart. The first is from segregationist Alabama Gov. George Wallace (D). The second was made by two liberal professors this month.In one of the most chilling developments in our history, the left has come to embrace the authoritarian language and logic of segregationists in calling for defiance and radical measures against the Supreme Court.In a recent open letter, Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet and San Francisco State University political scientist Aaron Belkin called upon President Joe Biden to defy rulings of the Supreme Court that he considers “mistaken” in the name of “popular constitutionalism.” Thus, in light of the court’s bar on the use of race in college admissions, they argue that Biden should just continue to follow his own constitutional interpretation…What is most striking about these professors is how they continue to claim they are defenders of democracy, yet seek to use unilateral executive authority to defy the courts and, in cases like the tuition forgiveness and affirmative action, the majority of the public.
Jim Thompson of RedState adds this:
America cannot function unless the three branches of government operate as they were intended. Congress passes laws, and if they comport to constitutional mandate, they are enforced by the executive branch. If they are not constitutional, the Supreme Court must strike down those laws, and the executive branch is mandated to abide by those decisions. What the president cannot do is simply act as a proxy king and ignore the Supreme Court.Yet, here we are. That is what men like Tushnet and Belkin want and why they are dangerous.
Stephen L. Miller, who writes for the Spectator and the Washington Examiner, has been raising the alarm on this since 2018.
All the talk from the left about Trump destroying our norms was window dressing. What happens when Democrats start ignoring the Supreme Court?
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY