Author and cultural critic Fran Lebowitz added voice to the unhinged calls on the left for trashing the Supreme Court. As I discussed recently in the Wall Street Journal (and in my book), there is a growing counter-constitutional movement in the United States led by law professors, pundits, and celebrities. Lebowitz amplified those calls in a radical demand to simply get rid of the Court.
Lebowitz called for President Joe Biden to “dissolve the Supreme Court” despite the fact that it would violate the Constitution and remove one of the most critical protections against executive and legislative abuse.
Lebowitz insisted that the Supreme Court is a “disgrace” because, in a reference to Donald Trump, it is “completely his.” To the wild applause of the New York audience, she added: “It’s so disgraceful, this court, that it shouldn’t even be allowed to be called the Supreme Court. It’s an insult to Motown. Basically, it’s a harem. It’s Trump’s harem.”
Her views aligned with others on the left who have attacked the Constitution, the Court, and even rights like free speech as now threats to our democracy.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer previously declared in front of the Supreme Court, “I want to tell you, [Neil] Gorsuch, I want to tell you, [Brett] Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) announced that she wants the impeachment of all six of the conservative justices. She was immediately joined by other Democratic members.
Previously, Ocasio-Cortez admitted that she does not understand why we even have a Supreme Court. She asked “How much does the current structure benefit us? And I don’t think it does.”
Other members, such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), have called for packing the Court with additional members to immediately secure a liberal majority to rule as she desires.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., RI), has assured voters that Vice President Kamala Harris will support the packing of the Court with a liberal majority.
Despite supporting censorship to combat “disinformation,” many on the left now eagerly spread disinformation about the Court and its rulings. Lebowitz repeated false claims about the Court’s ruling on presidential immunity, stating that the decision makes the president a “king” who “can do whatever you want.”
In reality, the Court followed the same approach that it has taken in prior conflicts between the branches.
As it has in the past, the Court adopted a three-tiered approach to presidential powers based on the source of a presidential action. Chief Justice John Roberts cited Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer, in which the court ruled against President Harry Truman’s takeover of steel mills.
In his famous concurrence to Youngstown, Justice Robert Jackson broke down the balance of executive and legislative authority between three types of actions. In the first, a president acts with express or implied authority from Congress. In the second, he acts where Congress is silent (“the zone of twilight” area). In the third, the president acts in defiance of Congress.
In this decision, the court adopted a similar sliding scale. It held that presidents enjoy absolute immunity for actions that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” while they enjoy presumptive immunity for other official acts. They do not enjoy immunity for unofficial or private actions.
None of this matters. Facts do not matter. Many on the left are calling for the trashing of the Constitution based on wildly inaccurate claims.
Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley law school, is author of “No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States,” published last month. In a 2021 Los Angeles Times op-ed, he described conservative justices as “partisan hacks.”
In the New York Times, book critic Jennifer Szalai scoffs at what she calls “Constitution worship.” She writes: “Americans have long assumed that the Constitution could save us; a growing chorus now wonders whether we need to be saved from it.” She frets that by limiting the power of the majority, the Constitution “can end up fostering the widespread cynicism that helps authoritarianism grow.”
In a 2022 New York Times op-ed, “The Constitution Is Broken and Should Not Be Reclaimed,” law professors Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale called for liberals to “reclaim America from constitutionalism.”
Lebowitz previously said that Trump should be killed with the help of the Saudi government.
Lebowitz is demonstrably wrong about the voting record of the justices. In reality, the Court continues to rule largely by unanimous, or nearly unanimous decisions. After April, unanimity stood at 46 percent of cases.
Of the 22 6-3 decisions, only half broke along ideological lines. That is the same as the 11 such cases last term.
The average for unanimous decisions has been roughly 43 percent. The rate is back up to 48 percent for the last term. When you add the nearly unanimous opinions, it is the vast majority of cases. Moreover, Sotomayor agreed with Roberts in 71% of cases Kavanaugh and Barrett agreed with Sotomayor roughly 70% of the time.
In critical decisions, conservative justices like Gorsuch and Barrett have joined their liberal colleagues and the Court has repeatedly voted against positions supported by Donald Trump.
Again, none of this matters. Lebowitz and others are falsely telling the public that the Court is dysfunctionally and ideologically divided. Of course, even if you accept the false premise, the problem is not with the liberal justices always voting as a block but the conservatives doing so. The liberals are not robotic, they are simply right.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Illiberal progressives have been frightening themselves and others for years that a Trump presidency portends the end of freedom in America, and now it is they who wish to remove the one branch of government that is the bastion that protects us from the excesses of the other two. Lebowitz is terribly confused. If it is the end of liberty that she and her ilk want, it should be Trump they support – not Harris.
Could say that America has entered a contemporary era of the dark ages. Or, it could be said that America is undergoing a societal civil war of governance without the opposing sides being armed for a battlefield confrontation.
Turley’s MO, always attack anyone who disagrees with the Federalist Society’s idea of a fair Supreme Court, but says nothing about a disgraced twice impeached convicted felon who has made it clear he wants to terminate the constitution. Or Trump’s idea of making the DOJ his personal department to arrest anybody he wishes. Turley enables Trump every chance he gets, and gets paid very well for it, but for Turley to be absolutely silent on what Trump has made clear, makes any statement by Turley about the SCOTUS moot.
Not one thing you just said is true.
Not one thing you said is true.
💩💩💩💩
Fish dip, you and GiGi, Deniss are all neck and neck. Come on now, I know you got it in you, get that squirrel to working! You can do it!
The Supreme Court is not “fair,” the Supreme Court is impartially constitutional, swearing an oath to support its “manifest tenor.”
For example, secession is not prohibited and is fully constitutional, which the Supreme Court of 1869 corruptly denied for the political benefit of Lincoln’s communist successors.
And abortion is not a “right” provided by the invalid and illegitimate 14th Amendment “privacy” clause, as hypothesized by the corrupt Supreme Court of 1973 that fully knew better, but an issue subject to decision by State legislatures (i.e. Dobbs).
The problem with leftism has always been the attitude of do it our way or die. There ideals are always superior in their minds. This is way extreme leftism is a stepping stone to communism.
No, it’s a stepping stone to caveman.
Fran who?? Well, whoever she is, she got fifteen more minutes of stale fame. Didn’t brighten my day.
For her information, Democrats don’t abolish institutions. They subvert them.
They didn’t build that, but they love to corrupt it.
The love to covet it, bear false witness regarding it, and steal it through “redistribution.”
It’s a sin.
@Upstate
We can certainly try, but covid and the J6 hearings/sentences are a good example of just how far they’ll go, and how many will capitulate. I think personally it’s a mistake to continue to harbor under the illusion that the modern left possesses any restraint whatsoever. There is no room for anyone sitting the vote out in November, IMO.
A concentrated camp is to good for the likes of Leibovitz Send her to Gaza or better yet send her a brand new pager
We hear leftists constantly telling us that the election of Donald Trump would threaten “our democracy.” I’m fact, the opposite is true. The election K. Harris would take us to the brink of establishment of a one-party police state. Harris would be surrounded by people telling her that we are in a crisis of some kind that can only be resolved by Presidential dictatorial rule. She will not have the inner convictions to resist those siren songs.
These people are Communists. The Constitution and the Supreme Court is standing in the way of a complete Communist takeover of this country.
It appears that our nation is divided near equally. Let Conservative voters take the east coast and contiguous like mined States and give the Communists the west coast, NY and contiguous like minded States. They can run their new country the way they see fit, Conservatives can run New America in the traditional manner less the corruption and influence of dual citizenship, the federal reserve and new legislation to prevent this from happening again. Let’s see who is standing in 8 years. No open borders either, meaning when your utopian dream turns to chit, you get to eat the sandwich.
“…They can run their new country the way they see fit…”
I think I might quibble over a few details, but in general, I think that is the only rational way to save this enterprise.
It’s just part of North America now. It’s nothing but illness. Fran L. Is a
NY humorist. She has known only freedom. Maybe Maher wasn’t at his best.
Inconsequential
Human beings never change, and the same vile individuals always manage to emerge when they feel safe in their views. Make no mistake about it: these people are the enemies of Western Civilization and must be literally destroyed along with their families and friends because their will destroy you, your family and friends without hesitation.
“Make no mistake about it: these people are the enemies of Western Civilization and must be literally destroyed along with their families and friends because their will destroy you, your family and friends without hesitation.” Stop talking about trump
C. X. Alexandre,
I do hope you are wrong but I fear you are right.
It is good to see the left reveal itself as a nakedly political “what works for me right now” bunch so we can all see it and recognize what is at stake in elections. These are people who would sweep aside 250 years of what has worked because it doesn’t suit them right now rather than win elections and change institutions with the support of the public.
Left? Excuse me?
trump is the one that tried to stay in power after Jan 6, 2021 when he lost the election. I’m pretty sure that is an anti democratic move.
Look at the republican party, it is now controlled by the trump family. And they pay themselves handsomely for short speeches. Melania sure made out well, over $200,000 for a short speech to some republican women. And how about the rest of the trump family, grifters every one of them.
Did you buy your trump watch? You probably got a degree at trump U. Oh wait, that was disbanded and he had to repay millions of dollars for the fraud it was. Perhaps you’ve eaten some trump steaks lately. Oh sorry, also defunct. Taken a flight on trump airlines. Oops, bankrupt. Stayed in a trump casino? Oh sorry also bankrupt. Perhaps trump has slept with your wife and paid her handsomely. He loves to do that as well.
The left? Get a life.
There’s so much wrong here its difficult to unpack. “Trump opened businesses who failed and declared bankruptcy!” Yup. That happens often. The majority of businesses fail. Its why the bankruptcy process exists for both businesses and individuals.
But a better question would be how life long politicians (on both sides) become millionaires without doing anything and only making $200k per year. Or better, why the only branch of government that doesn’t ACTUALLY CREATE LAWS is the one the left wants to destroy? Obviously because its the only branch of government that is limiting on absolute power.
Finally, “Jan 6 was an attempt to stay in power.” How?! This is such an irrational statement that it is amazing you publicly put those words together.
The mind of the left everyone. The amount of cognitive dissonance would be entertaining if it weren’t so troubling.
“The majority of businesses fail. Its why the bankruptcy process exists for both businesses and individuals.”
That might (tongue only partially in cheek) be another reason to vote for Trump. Who better to serve as chief executive of a nation that is fundamentally bankrupt than someone who has personally experienced the ins and outs of that situation ;>?
Trumps net worth is about 5B
His successes greatly exceed his failures
Nor did trump profit by using public power
He did so in the free market
Not the government controlled market if the left
His success may be overinflated. He’s already been found guilty of falsifying his property values. He profited by scamming people and overvaluing property. Trump doesn’t have enough cash to pay $450 million in fines.
I would suggest watching the nys Supreme Court in oral arguments
The enmoron case is DOA
The only question is which of many errors results in reversal
Btw Forbes do not use self appraisals
They value wealthy people based on their own market appraisals
I have no idea how much cash trump has
And why is that relevant
You do not profit from overvaluing something
You profit by selling it for more than it cost
I do not want a trump watch or gold sneakers
But if you do
It is no scam
Nothing is hidden
You know what you are buying
Buy
Don’t
But not a scam just because you do not think these things are worth buying
I’ll read “The Art of the Deal” someday.
The log cabin republicans are gay men
Gore tried to stay in power
This country is not a democracy
Though I would note that Harris has not won a single vote in any presidential primary yet she is the democrats nominee
When ever has anything that undemocratic occurred
If you do not want trump watches
Don’t buy them
If you do not want to hear Melania speak
Do not attend
If you do not like trump u
Don’t go there
Free people engaging in the free market are no threat to the republic
Democrats law fare and censorship are
While the open border and the economy are the two big issues with voters going into the November election, packing the Supreme Court will immediately become Issue No. 1 if our little San Francisco Communist wins the election. She will have to lock in her victory and make it permanent. And after wearing that $62,000 Tiffany’s necklace on her recent border visit to Douglas, Arizona, we can now call her America’s Evita Peron…..
if our little San Francisco Communist wins
God forbid.
The Left’s instincts are always totalitarian.
What does the $62,000.00 necklace have to do with this discussion. I was beginning to like you, and your arguments! carolabriola@gmail.com
“What does the $62,000.00 necklace have to do with this discussion. ”
Maybe a visit to an area devastated by open border policies to articulate polices for correcting that situation is an occasion that calls for a serious demeanor, not crass, show-off, ostentatiousness?
* The necklace is a campaign contribution.
And?
Did you just try to doxx skyraider?
Who is Carol Abriola?
Somehow JT has blinders on to the corruption going on in the trump household but sees evil everywhere with Biden.
“To be fair, the former president does seem to be a champion of certain working women. Trump’s wife and his female relatives have been getting paid extraordinary amounts of money for “work” relating to his campaign. According to a recent financial disclosure form, for example, Melania Trump was paid $237,500 for an April “speaking engagement” by the Log Cabin Republicans, a conservative LGBTQ+ group. A CNN report this week, however, notes that the president of the Log Cabin Republicans has said they didn’t actually put up the money for Melania Trump to speak, so it’s unclear who exactly the source of the payment was. In other words: it’s exactly the sort of opaque and ethically dubious situation you’d expect to find the Trumps in.”
But hey, there is maybe a 1% chance trump becomes president and then JT becomes the AG. Not likely but it’s worth throwing your reputation away on a 1% gamble right?
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/sep/28/kimberly-guilfoyle-kamala-harris-trump
As is typical you demand public transparency for purely private legal transactions
Few care who paid Melanie to speak
Nor does she need the money
The right focuses on the speaking fees of democrats actually in office
As speaking fees and book deals for those in government or just out can be a vehicle for bribery
But what matters is not the money
But the influence on the use of public power
Are you arguing that you need to know who paid Melania because she might get president trump to issue an executive order expanding trans rights in government?
Hillary received money from Russia and supported pro Russian policy
Not merely pro Russia but pro the people who contributed
I’m lease explain who could be paying Melania that would be public corruption?
I will bet the money was put up by the Westboro Baptist Church
“it’s unclear who exactly the source of the payment was. In other words: it’s exactly the sort of opaque and ethically dubious situation you’d expect to find the Trumps in.”
It’s Putin’s money. He is giving it to Trump because Putin doesn’t want WW3. (S)
This is quite amusing! It seems like Turley may have had some free time and decided to share a bit of political satire with his easily swayed readers this morning. It’s no surprise that political pundits and professors often share their fantasies and ideas about the supreme court, especially given its recent questionable rulings.
Interestingly, Turley himself seems to support the concept of expanding the court and gradually increasing its size. What’s ironic is that there is actually legislation proposing exactly that. So, why hasn’t he expressed support for this idea? The proposed legislation suggests expanding the court to 15 justices over a 12-year period, ensuring no favorable outcome for either party. It seems like Turley would be in favor of such a proposal.
It’s rather amusing how Turley gives so much weight to the opinions of other professors and pundits, even though he seems to fuel the very rage that he complains about. It’s quite hypocritical, don’t you think?
Gee, when the Warren Court outraged conservatives I don’t recall anyone calling for the abolition of the Court. Those “fantasies” seem to only come from the left. Beware all. When the left has fantasies, like people can change their gender by surgically removing body parts, the “fantasies” have a way of hitting the mainstream, Thanks to Prof Turley for sounding an early warning.
Conservatives were not as activist as they are now. They still vehemently opposed anything coming out of the Warren court. Different times, different attitudes.
Right
Sen joe Maccarthy was not a firebrand or activist ?
Rewrite history much ?
And are conservatives trying to overturn brown ? Gideon ? Miranda ? NYT v Sullivan?
The most important decisions of the Warren court are near universally accepted including by conservatives
In fact conservatives have expanded on the pro bill of rights literalism of the Warren court and the incorporation of those rights by the 14th amendment to limit states
The Warren court was an important bulwark against conservative censorship at the time
Today it is progressives that are pro censorship and conservatives fighting for the bill of rights
No conservatives are not still vehemently fighting anything out of the Warren court
They are staunchly supporting most of it
“ And are conservatives trying to overturn brown ? Gideon ? Miranda ? NYT v Sullivan?
The most important decisions of the Warren court are near universally accepted including by conservatives”
LOL! That’s literally what they are not saying today. They want to get rid of Sullivan, they have been against Brown for years. That’s why they are pushing got school choice so hard. They want segregated schools by privatizing as much as possible.
They want to get rid of Sullivan ? Really ?
Sullivan limited the use of defamation lawsuits as political weapons
It is not republicans engaged in law fare
My kids went to cyber charters
They are both Asian
Possibly 40% of their classmates were black
School choice is not segregating schools
It is providing better education to people who can not afford private education
That is mostly working class people a large proportion of whom are minorities
Once again you rant about things you are clueless about
Why expand the court ?
The reasons matter
Turley believes a larger court can better handle the workload
That is false
Larger bodies move slower not faster
But you and the left wish to expand the court to alter the decisions it makes
That is an entirely different basis
Opposition to the legislation you cite is because the only actual problem it seeks to fix is that the court sometimes gets the constitution right
There are better ways to actually address the problem turley cites than expanding the Supreme Court that do not undermine the constitution
The simplest is to create a superior court of the United States between scotus and the circuit appeals courts
This would increase the volume of appreciate walls that could be handled
It would help resolve circuit splits
And still preserve a small Supreme Court focused only on import constitutional issues
Expanding the court can address the problem of credibility. Turley agrees with the idea. Conservatives oppose it because it undermines the court’s current rightward tilt.
A bigger court would be more balanced, and it would be harder for any party to steer the court in either ideological direction.
Maybe you could expand your education and intelligence to combat your bias and “would be more balanced,” georgie.
It would clearly address the problem with your credibility.
“. . . easily swayed readers this morning.”
More Leftist projection.
To wit: The Harris voters who can’t name a single one of her policies or a single one of her “accomplishments” as VP. But they are “easily swayed” by “joy,” empty abstractions, and gibberish.
Jonathan: I’ll get to your column about Fran Lebowitz and your claim about the “left trashing the Supreme Court”. But first some other important news you missed this week–something you do frequently these days in trying to protect DJT and the conservative majority on the SC from criticism.
— Your “free speech” hero Elon Musk is going back on his promise to eliminate censorship on Twitter. Turns out his definition of “free speech” is ONLY speech that agrees with him. One woman signed up for X. Elon came up as the first person she could “friend”. When she blocked him she was immediately suspended.
Then we have journalist Ken Klippenstein. The New Republic reported on Thursday Klippenstein tried to post the 271-page dossier on JD Vance, a very unflattering portrait of the VP nominee put together by DJT’s campaign research. Mainstream media refused to publish the dossier so KK tried to fill the void by posting it on X. . Hours after his post he was banned from X. X users who tried to provide a link to Klippenstein’s Subtrack newsletter received as a blocking message that their links were “potentially harmful”. It’s pretty clear Elon is blocking anything critical of DJT. That’s OK because it’s his platform. But that’s not what Elon promised when he bought Twitter. These days if you don’t support DJT and Musk’s conspiracies theories you will find X an unwelcome platform!
–Kamala Harris toured the southern border on Friday. At a rally in Wisconsin yesterday DJT complained that Fox News covered the Harris visit: “I have to sit there and listen to her bulls**t last night. And who puts it on? Fox News, and they shouldn’t be allowed to put it on”. For the Trumpster any news coverage of his political opponents should be banned. That’s how autocrat DJT would rule if he got back into the WH!
–Finally, despite polls showing Harris leads DJT in many states, DJT and his campaign keep citing Rasmussen polls showing he is in the lead. On Friday, the New Republic had an article “Major Conservative Poll Cited by Media Secretly Worked with Trump Team”. Turns out Rasmussen shared its polling data with DJT advisors Dan Scavino, Susie Wiles and John McLaughlin. Emails show there was coordination between Rasmussen, the Heartland Institute, a conservative public policy think tank, and the DJT campaign. Heartland is a 501(c)3 nonprofit and is prohibited by law from engaging in political activity to benefit a political candidate. It appears Rasmussen may not be the reliable pollster it claims.
Trump gets roaring welcome at epic Alabama-Georgia football game, flags NFL rule change
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-gets-roaring-welcome-epic-alabama-georgia-football-game
JD Vance event at Pa. restaurant spirals into chaos after manager briefly turns away pol despite dozens of supporters waiting inside
https://nypost.com/2024/09/28/us-news/vance-briefly-barred-from-primanti-brothers-at-campaign-stop/
Almost 80% of recent antisemitic incidents were from the far left: Combat Antisemitism Movement
https://justthenews.com/nation/extremism/almost-80-antisemitic-incidents-are-far-left-combat-antisemitism-movement?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter?utm_source=referral&utm_medium=offthepress&utm_campaign=home
Walz Education Appointee Calls for the Overthrow of the U.S.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/walz-education-appointee-calls-for-the-overthrow-of-the-u-s/
* at least they aren’t hiding anymore. There it is.. .
Hillary Says She Didn’t Go Far Enough In Describing Trump Supporters As “Deplorables”
https://modernity.news/2024/09/27/hillary-says-she-didnt-go-far-enough-in-describing-trump-supporters-as-deplorables/
Upstate is leveling the left with his sources, undiscovered by the MSM. In that process he forces Dennis to close his eyes tighter so Dennis remains synonymous with Stupid.
OT Upstate becoming more and more like Dennis everyday
So you are upset that Elon is doing to you what you did to everyone you disliked
Btw why is it that what you claim is censored on X is not readily available on Facebook or instagram?
During trumps presidency the only government censorship was done by the DHS CIA FBI behind his back and was often censorship of him or his supporters
Trump says lots of things I do not like
Democrats do them
Fox would greatly prefer any republican but trump
Trump is greatly disliked by fox advertisers
Shaddup
God help us from these useless morons they waste the air they breathe
We should start asking why Democrats want to eliminate the Constitution and the Supreme Court, because their motives should be exposed. Democrats are for censorship, for starters. Silencing their opposition would be a lot easier if the pesky First Amendment and the Supreme Court weren’t around. And all those “laws” imposed by Biden’s agencies that were shot down by the SC because they were unconstitutional would be enacted if there were no Constitution and SC. Discrimination against whites would also be fair game, and Sen Warnock’s racist funding for “black-only” businesses and farms would have gone unnoticed if the SC hadn’t corrected this blatantly unconstitutional law. The Democrats want to sneak fascism in through the back door, and only the SC and the Constitution have stopped them so far.
Get real.
SCOTUS isn’t going anywhere. And I seriously doubt it will increase in numbers. Most people don’t have the radar to detect the subtle methods the Regime has successfully used to get us to this point. The last thing these enemies of our Constitutional Republic want to do is to go from termites to a tropical storm. People tend to take notice.
Instead, the Regime will continue to act in defiance of the constitution. They will force conservatives to defend it. If and when these attacks are challenged through the courts, damage will be done while it works its way through the courts.
Wash. Rinse Repeat.
@Olly
Ordinarily I’d agree, and in terms of the older guard, I still would. Modern, younger radicals however, of whom there are many, do not possess the foresight you describe, and that is the direction the torch is being passed; eventually it’ll be inevitable, no one lives forever.
We’ve already seen in microcosm the piles of ash they are happy to create out of their ignorance. I don’t think it’s too late, personally, but nothing is guaranteed or a given at this point.
James,
As we have seen, they are nothing more than hyper emotional six year olds who want what they want, and they want it now. They think they know everything and anyone who disagrees with them they either ignore or call them dumb names. What they want is power. What they want is to rig the system in their favor so they are in total control.
The good news is, we wont let them.
Phukin A Upstate!