You know, when Supreme Court justices knew what their job is, and tried to do it, even if they didn’t much like it?
Neither do I. Not directly; but I know it happened sometimes, from studying history.
Associate Justice Elena Kagan doesn’t even know that much.
I’m not talking about any particular decision or even any particular series of decisions, but if over time the court loses all connection with the public and with public sentiment, that’s a dangerous thing for a democracy.
The only way the Supreme Court should be considering “public sentiment” is through the laws the public enacts through their elected representatives, and weighing them against the limitations imposed by the Constitution. Supreme Court justices are appointed with the approval of the Senate, rather than being elected so that they do not have to kowtow to public opinion.
America is supposed to be a constitutional republic, not a direct democracy where anything can be done with a majority vote.
If we were still a constitutional republic, that one statement would be grounds for Kagan’s removal from the bench.
And the hell she isn’t talking about any specific decisions. She’s talking about Bruen and Dobbs.
(More Tip Jar Options) |
