An important and perfectly written argument. Thinking about how different the SCOTUS - and our country - would be today if not for Bush V Gore and Mitch McConnell.; If pissed off Bernie bros in Michigan and Pennsylvania voted for Hillary instead of sitting that one out. If Biden, et al listened to Anita Hill. Thinking about it makes me physically ill.
You’re physically ill because of this; you’re mentally ill if you think ‘pissed off Bernis bros’ who refused to vote for a corporate-owned Zionist war monger, instead of the disgusting war monger herself, was the problem.
Get out of your ‘they suck worse’ tribal silo and understand both parties brought us to this place.
Not quite, Tom. This Court was packed by Republicans. It has legitimized the "unitary" presidency, a dictatorship in practice, and it is enabling the destruction of the US Constitution. Yes, this is class politics, fascist politics to be specific.
Quite, Victor. Every confirmation vote for GOP nominees since Carter was POTUS has Democrats in the ‘yea’ column. Hell, eleven voted for Thomas. Furthermore, how did the GOP pack the Court? They won elections. How did a bunch of corporate-owned assholes do that, pray tell? Answer: the Dems chased donor cash, abandoned the working class, and became GOP lite, stupidly thinking that was the path to favorable electoral outcome.
And please, enough with the unitary executive legitimization argument. As is the case with reproductive rights, the Dems had plenty of opportunity to check unitary theory via legislation, and punted. Obama, Mr. Constitutional lawyer, had no issue with assassinating American citizens. Drone on.
Hey, man. I’m a lifelong progressive. Never joined a party. Voted for Bernie in every primary. On Election Day, I voted against Trump - three times now. Anyone who didn’t vote against him whenever they had the chance shares some blame for where we are now.
If you voted for either Clinton, Obama, Biden, or Harris, you voted for Trump, because neoliberal, corporate-owned Democrats are what enabled the crazy to take over the GOP, which led directly to Trump.
I voted for Obama, the first time, so yes, I share some blame. It was the only time I’ve voted for a Dem since Mondale, and I knew I’d made a mistake before he was inaugurated, after he filled his economic team with Wall Street whores and did a 180 on warrantless surveillance.
There are plenty of people who consider themselves progressive, who, when faced with the choice of voting for a lesser evil corporate-owned candidate or a candidate who actually espouses progressive policy solutions, choose the former based on fear and the electability fallacy. They think they are being pragmatic. I consider them cowards, just like the politicians they elect.
It seems you’re intent on not considering the consequences, particularly the point of the author’s piece on the NYT shutting the barn door with a new team dedicated to the SCOTUS. All I was saying is that if GW Bush (and GHW Bush for that matter) and Trump were never elected, we’d have a SCOTUS more aligned with the majority of Americans. And vastly less insane.
Go ahead and have a last word. This is the last I’m saying on my way out of this circular argument.
Sorry, Michael, but it is you who have the consequences deficit, and this argument isn’t circular. Read Democracy Incorporated. SCOTUS is just another piece of the linear path towards our state of inverted corporate totalitarianism that Wolin articulated; the wet dream of the Powell Memo, if you will.
And as long as we’re playing the ‘if’ game, if the Dems had responded to the election of Reagan and the idea of ‘free’ market neoliberal economic policy by countering with a full-throated endorsement of FDR’s proposed second bill of rights, and going scorched earth on the supply side insanity, instead of bending over and going along with insane tax cuts, and ‘government is the problem’ bullshit, Trump would never have sniffed the Oval Office.
We still blaming Bernie supporters even with the mountains of data that debunk that nonsense? And here I thought we were the reasonable & intelligent ones...
What you’re describing goes beyond politics as usual. This is a constitutional and moral crisis, not just a partisan or electoral one. The Court isn’t merely influencing policy outcomes; it’s redefining who counts, who can claim harm, and who the law is meant to protect. That’s a legitimacy problem at the foundation of the system.
When an institution with lifetime power consistently narrows democracy, shields concentrated wealth, and insulates itself from accountability, the issue isn’t whether voters can “respond” politically—it’s whether the constitutional order is still functioning as promised. In that sense, replacement isn’t radical; it’s a demand that the system realign with its own stated principles.
So yes—this calls for more than a political response. It calls for a reckoning over power, accountability, and whose lives the law is designed to serve.
You are absolutely right about the corruption of the Court. Once a revered backstop (I know that sounds funny), the six are now contributing to the ruin of this country. Must think that after Trump becomes a full-on dictator he’ll keep them around. No one who supports Trump ever thinks the leopard will eat HIS face.
Impeach or expand? To do either we not only need a massive win in November, we need Dems with spines. That won't happen with Chuck Schumer running the show.
You left out one VERY important case. This was the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade (1973), and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), ruling that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Released on June 24, 2022, the 6-3 ruling, with a 5-justice majority on the core holding, returned the authority to regulate or prohibit abortion to individual state legislatures. In essence, in half the country, women have lost ownership of their own bodies. There is a term for this. It is called slavery. Abortion bans are a form of slavery.
Good point, Kenneth. In overturning Roe the justices willfully ignored the 14th Amendment, which protects every person, women included. These Republican justices were pre-approved by the Federalist Society to dismantle the federal government and void civil rights. The abortion issue was used as a Trojan Horse to pack the Court.
The present Court is the fruit of the Conservative Revolution launched by Newt Gingrich in the 1990s. They succeeded in packing the Court by using the abortion issue as a Trojan Horse, and in 2000 the new Court revealed itself by deciding the outcome of the presidential election. Project 2025 is their project, and Trump is their candidate.
This has been the thrust of Conservatism all along - since the inception of the country. Laws and government exist primarily to control the masses and keep them “in their place”, whereas the wealthy should be free to exercise their divine right to do whatever they please without restraint or consequence.
Yes and…. The founders were elite, wealthy men who talked a good game but fully appreciated the advantages of their class. I don’t know that creating a court that valued working people was their goal.
It's time we vet congressional candidates, incumbents included, with questions like are you prepared to impeach a supreme court justice, overturn Citizens United, etc. I get so many solicitations for donations that only rage against Trump rather than the loopholes and actions that allow his behavior; they must think I’m simpleton or they are.
Just like Congress these justices live in an alternate protective bubble that the rest of us do not enjoy. No rules, no reprecussions, above the law…. Entitled to do as they please. They must be removed
I always love your work but I thought that the CASA decision was by district. A TRO would apply in full in that judge’s district. I could be wrong though. Anyway your larger point stands and they should be impeached or legislation changed to overrule them if Congress ever wakes up.
I believe that for congress to remove any of them it would require impeachment (majority in the house) and conviction (two-thirds vote in the senate). So I think we're going to have to fix congress first. How we do that under the current system? Good question. Perhaps it ends in revolution again, I don't know. Maybe enough states can change their own rules on how they elect senators and how long they let them hang around.
I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one !!!
I can't afford my own lobbyist or write that $100,000 check.
An important and perfectly written argument. Thinking about how different the SCOTUS - and our country - would be today if not for Bush V Gore and Mitch McConnell.; If pissed off Bernie bros in Michigan and Pennsylvania voted for Hillary instead of sitting that one out. If Biden, et al listened to Anita Hill. Thinking about it makes me physically ill.
You’re physically ill because of this; you’re mentally ill if you think ‘pissed off Bernis bros’ who refused to vote for a corporate-owned Zionist war monger, instead of the disgusting war monger herself, was the problem.
Get out of your ‘they suck worse’ tribal silo and understand both parties brought us to this place.
No politics but class politics.
Not quite, Tom. This Court was packed by Republicans. It has legitimized the "unitary" presidency, a dictatorship in practice, and it is enabling the destruction of the US Constitution. Yes, this is class politics, fascist politics to be specific.
Quite, Victor. Every confirmation vote for GOP nominees since Carter was POTUS has Democrats in the ‘yea’ column. Hell, eleven voted for Thomas. Furthermore, how did the GOP pack the Court? They won elections. How did a bunch of corporate-owned assholes do that, pray tell? Answer: the Dems chased donor cash, abandoned the working class, and became GOP lite, stupidly thinking that was the path to favorable electoral outcome.
And please, enough with the unitary executive legitimization argument. As is the case with reproductive rights, the Dems had plenty of opportunity to check unitary theory via legislation, and punted. Obama, Mr. Constitutional lawyer, had no issue with assassinating American citizens. Drone on.
Hey, man. I’m a lifelong progressive. Never joined a party. Voted for Bernie in every primary. On Election Day, I voted against Trump - three times now. Anyone who didn’t vote against him whenever they had the chance shares some blame for where we are now.
If you voted for either Clinton, Obama, Biden, or Harris, you voted for Trump, because neoliberal, corporate-owned Democrats are what enabled the crazy to take over the GOP, which led directly to Trump.
I voted for Obama, the first time, so yes, I share some blame. It was the only time I’ve voted for a Dem since Mondale, and I knew I’d made a mistake before he was inaugurated, after he filled his economic team with Wall Street whores and did a 180 on warrantless surveillance.
There are plenty of people who consider themselves progressive, who, when faced with the choice of voting for a lesser evil corporate-owned candidate or a candidate who actually espouses progressive policy solutions, choose the former based on fear and the electability fallacy. They think they are being pragmatic. I consider them cowards, just like the politicians they elect.
It seems you’re intent on not considering the consequences, particularly the point of the author’s piece on the NYT shutting the barn door with a new team dedicated to the SCOTUS. All I was saying is that if GW Bush (and GHW Bush for that matter) and Trump were never elected, we’d have a SCOTUS more aligned with the majority of Americans. And vastly less insane.
Go ahead and have a last word. This is the last I’m saying on my way out of this circular argument.
Sorry, Michael, but it is you who have the consequences deficit, and this argument isn’t circular. Read Democracy Incorporated. SCOTUS is just another piece of the linear path towards our state of inverted corporate totalitarianism that Wolin articulated; the wet dream of the Powell Memo, if you will.
And as long as we’re playing the ‘if’ game, if the Dems had responded to the election of Reagan and the idea of ‘free’ market neoliberal economic policy by countering with a full-throated endorsement of FDR’s proposed second bill of rights, and going scorched earth on the supply side insanity, instead of bending over and going along with insane tax cuts, and ‘government is the problem’ bullshit, Trump would never have sniffed the Oval Office.
We still blaming Bernie supporters even with the mountains of data that debunk that nonsense? And here I thought we were the reasonable & intelligent ones...
What you’re describing goes beyond politics as usual. This is a constitutional and moral crisis, not just a partisan or electoral one. The Court isn’t merely influencing policy outcomes; it’s redefining who counts, who can claim harm, and who the law is meant to protect. That’s a legitimacy problem at the foundation of the system.
When an institution with lifetime power consistently narrows democracy, shields concentrated wealth, and insulates itself from accountability, the issue isn’t whether voters can “respond” politically—it’s whether the constitutional order is still functioning as promised. In that sense, replacement isn’t radical; it’s a demand that the system realign with its own stated principles.
So yes—this calls for more than a political response. It calls for a reckoning over power, accountability, and whose lives the law is designed to serve.
“Has gone rouge.” As red as Kavanaugh’s alcoholic cheeks.
Perhap gone rouge (red) fits the situation just fine.
He meant rogue.
Do you think?
You are absolutely right about the corruption of the Court. Once a revered backstop (I know that sounds funny), the six are now contributing to the ruin of this country. Must think that after Trump becomes a full-on dictator he’ll keep them around. No one who supports Trump ever thinks the leopard will eat HIS face.
Impeach or expand? To do either we not only need a massive win in November, we need Dems with spines. That won't happen with Chuck Schumer running the show.
So that means replacing his colleagues who keep him there as well. They are ALL still sitting it out in MN, WHY ARE NONE OF THEM THERE??
You left out one VERY important case. This was the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe v. Wade (1973), and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), ruling that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Released on June 24, 2022, the 6-3 ruling, with a 5-justice majority on the core holding, returned the authority to regulate or prohibit abortion to individual state legislatures. In essence, in half the country, women have lost ownership of their own bodies. There is a term for this. It is called slavery. Abortion bans are a form of slavery.
Good point, Kenneth. In overturning Roe the justices willfully ignored the 14th Amendment, which protects every person, women included. These Republican justices were pre-approved by the Federalist Society to dismantle the federal government and void civil rights. The abortion issue was used as a Trojan Horse to pack the Court.
Absolutely TRUE!
HJR-54. Eliminates the twin concepts of corporate personhood and money as speech. Do not vote for any House candidate who declines to co-sponsor.
More info here - MoveToAmend.org
There is nothing Republicans would like more than having a constitutional convention. They enjoy majorities in most state legislatures.
Nothing said in my comment or link about a constitutional convention.
Next.
The present Court is the fruit of the Conservative Revolution launched by Newt Gingrich in the 1990s. They succeeded in packing the Court by using the abortion issue as a Trojan Horse, and in 2000 the new Court revealed itself by deciding the outcome of the presidential election. Project 2025 is their project, and Trump is their candidate.
This has been the thrust of Conservatism all along - since the inception of the country. Laws and government exist primarily to control the masses and keep them “in their place”, whereas the wealthy should be free to exercise their divine right to do whatever they please without restraint or consequence.
Yes, Bill, but during the Cold War fear of Communism placed some restraint on them. Now it is just us vs them.
Yes and…. The founders were elite, wealthy men who talked a good game but fully appreciated the advantages of their class. I don’t know that creating a court that valued working people was their goal.
When you live in a corporatocracy, individuals do not matter. All that matters is money and power and ego.
It's time we vet congressional candidates, incumbents included, with questions like are you prepared to impeach a supreme court justice, overturn Citizens United, etc. I get so many solicitations for donations that only rage against Trump rather than the loopholes and actions that allow his behavior; they must think I’m simpleton or they are.
Just like Congress these justices live in an alternate protective bubble that the rest of us do not enjoy. No rules, no reprecussions, above the law…. Entitled to do as they please. They must be removed
I always love your work but I thought that the CASA decision was by district. A TRO would apply in full in that judge’s district. I could be wrong though. Anyway your larger point stands and they should be impeached or legislation changed to overrule them if Congress ever wakes up.
I believe that for congress to remove any of them it would require impeachment (majority in the house) and conviction (two-thirds vote in the senate). So I think we're going to have to fix congress first. How we do that under the current system? Good question. Perhaps it ends in revolution again, I don't know. Maybe enough states can change their own rules on how they elect senators and how long they let them hang around.