General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJustice Breyer's new warning for Democrats couldn't have come at a worse time
Justice Breyers new warning for Democrats couldnt have come at a worse time
American democracy is in crisis. Breyer thinks nows the time to scold his fellow liberals.
By Ian Millhiser May 29, 2021, 9:00am EDT
Justice Stephen Breyer a Bill Clinton appointee who has served on the Supreme Court since 1994 has chosen this moment to admonish liberals for failing to respect the rule of law.
Hes done so despite the fact that less than five months ago, a violent mob of former President Donald Trumps supporters invaded the US Capitol in a vain attempt to keep Trump, who had just lost his bid for reelection, in office without an electoral mandate. In the months that followed, state-level Republicans loyal to Trump passed legislation that appears to serve no purpose other than to restrict voting. And now, Republican leaders are blocking a bipartisan investigation into the January 6 riots at the Capitol.
And yet, in the midst of what might be the greatest threat to liberal democracy in the United States since Jim Crow, Breyer warns that liberals are endangering the rule of law because a small minority of Democrats have suggested taking aggressive action to rein in the Supreme Court.
And Breyer is doing this at the same time that hes urging Democrats to find common ground with a party that refuses to investigate an attack that endangered much of Congress.
more...
https://www.vox.com/22454648/justice-stephen-breyer-supreme-court-retirement-book-harvard-court-packing-voting-democracy
Lovie777
(12,237 posts)gab13by13
(21,317 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,308 posts)Link to tweet
...
But his book can be read as an indictment of such timed retirements, which are an unavoidably political act the entire purpose of Breyers retirement would be to ensure his seat is filled by a Democrat. And Breyers new book is a manifesto against the idea that courts should be perceived as political. If the public comes to see judges as merely politicians in robes, he writes, its confidence in the courts, and in the rule of law itself, can only decline.
He seems clueless, frankly. As if he's forgotten the past 25 years. He's writing what he wishes were true, but not what reality is. And he thinks it's a good idea for him to continue, despite the risk of a seventh conservative justice replacing him if he hangs on until illness forces him to retire.
babylonsister
(171,057 posts)PortTack
(32,757 posts)aocommunalpunch
(4,236 posts)ananda
(28,858 posts)Dems, stand strong and ignore all Reep friendly advice.
Jon King
(1,910 posts)No rule of law when Garland's hearing never happened yet Trump got a judge in his last weeks in office. Time for court rebalancing.
Baitball Blogger
(46,700 posts)area51
(11,907 posts)Joinfortmill
(14,417 posts)hopefully, the Congressional democrats will carry on with defending our democracy and Justice Breyer will soon retire.
jaxexpat
(6,818 posts)"When they go low, we go high", Michelle Obama's appeal doesn't retain much credibility in the face of the new lows they've gone to.
It's about impossible to get ahead in a game where your opponent plays for blood while you "aren't playing".
The Republican's playbook has only one purpose, to dominate. We must understand they will ALWAYS go low. There's no need to wait and see how low. Time is wasting and a ivory towered fool has stolen air time, ripping our credibility with free propaganda for the enemy.
They control the "rule of law" by testing it, while we process their obfuscation they proceed with their illegal plan, like a knife through butter.
To get ahead of it the President must ARREST and JAIL them, removing them from the public forum while the courts grind away at their protests. Re-imprison all Trump's pardonees. It's a certainty they're guilty of enough other crimes that, were they an average citizen, they'd be in prison for years.
dlk
(11,560 posts)One persons opinion doesnt change the facts.
PortTack
(32,757 posts)OnDoutside
(19,954 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(48,999 posts)Rebl2
(13,494 posts)Hes out of touch and needs to go. Maybe its time to limit how long judges can remain on the Supreme Court. Maybe twenty years, maybe a little less.
spanone
(135,827 posts)CaptainTruth
(6,589 posts)Politicub
(12,165 posts)This kind of thing is frustrating. Of all the people to admonish, he goes after liberals.
I dont know if he said anything about the rush to seat Coney Barrette, but that is more damaging than a group of people who are floating an idea.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Bold strategy, Cotton.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,587 posts)Too fucking bad, boo fucking hoo.
Court expansion is perfectly legal, and IMO, strengthens the judiciary and makes it less partisan because the influence and impact of any single Justice is weakened and diluted.
Maybe thats what Breyer is pissed about...
Johonny
(20,836 posts)Which the size of the court is. I mean, that's how the constitution set it up. What he's demanding is the opposite. He wants the SC to tell congress how to make up the court. Totally against the rule of law!
maxsolomon
(33,316 posts)It must be nice.
We have to live in the world that is. The one that RW billionaires have forged with their money. The world of gerrymandering, ALEC, RW Radio, GQP obstruction of Obama's nominees, Trump's packing of the courts.
Breyer can't retire soon enough.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)20 years and you're off the courts.
The congress is the premier branch of government and they determine the size of the court, not the court.
That court he serves on is owned by far right interest groups who seek to turn back all progress.
Grasswire2
(13,568 posts)....I would see a smug, deceitful face. I am really startled by his expression. Clueless. Smug. Deceitful.