Often it is difficult to believe what the left is saying.
Despite the fact that their arguments often seem irrational, there is usually rational, if incorrect, thought underlying their arguments. Here is one liberal’s take on the current debate over the Supreme Court:
There are two immediate ways in which right-wing judges and justices might help tilt the playing field in the GOP’s direction. The first is the prospect that Trump judges will move to protect the man who appointed them from criminal prosecution. That worry has only worsened with Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation—in a 2009 law review article, Kavanaugh advocated for a “temporary deferral of civil suits and criminal prosecutions and investigations” for sitting presidents. To be clear, there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits criminal prosecution of a sitting president. But the absence of an explicit constitutional bar may not stop partisan judges from discovering one.
The second immediate problem has to do with voting rights. The GOP’s voting base is white, old, and shrinking. A new liberal coalition—younger, more diverse, more urban, more educated—is set to displace it. But not if a right-wing judiciary turns a blind eye to the GOP’s hydra-headed voter suppression strategy. Using aggressive gerrymandering, voter ID laws, restrictions on early voting, and moves as blunt as shuttering voting sites in neighborhoods dominated by minority voters, the GOP works tirelessly to delay—and potentially halt—the demographic reckoning that it knows it faces.
It is a good idea to keep up on what the other side is saying. Read the rest of The Supreme Court Is a Historically Regressive and Presently Expendable Institution by Christopher Jon Sprigman.
Discover more from
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.