Nearly 30 years ago, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer was seated on the high court, and during that time he’s been a reliable ally of judicial activists. According to some, however, he isn’t “woke” enough to keep his job any longer and should retire to make way for a more politically correct appointment.
The Supreme Court has spent the past fifty years or so establishing a solid track record of judicial activism making decisions based on pretty much anything but the Constitution. And for nearly half that time, Breyer has served as a proponent of using the court’s power to make America more progressive.
In September 2015, Breyer put some of his thoughts on how that could be done in a book entitled, The Court and the World: American Law and the New Global Realities, where he shared his far-left observations about law and the court and how they need to think outside the box, constitutionally speaking.
According to Breyer, there’s clearly nothing wrong with American courts — including SCOTUS — considering the laws and judicial rulings of other nations when making a decision.
“If someone with a job roughly like my own, facing a legal problem roughly like the one confronting me, interpreting a document that resembles the one I look to, has written a legal opinion about a similar matter, why not read what that judge has said? I might learn from it, whether or not I end up agreeing with it.” (emphasis mine)
During an interview with Newsmax TV a few months after the book’s release, Breyer said:
“You have to know something about what’s going on beyond our shores, whether its law or practices or copyright or security,” Breyer said in an interview with J.D. Hayworth on “Newsmax Prime.”
“All kinds of things in order to get the right answer to a question about American law. [It’s] maybe 10 or 15 percent of our cases now.” (emphasis mine)
Did you catch what he said here? According to Breyer, the court should depend on things outside of American law in order to come up with the “right answer” concerning American law.
Constitution? He don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution.
Despite his obvious progressive bias, some are saying that Justice Breyer isn’t ‘woke’ enough to keep his job any longer. Demand Justice, a group that describes itself as “a progressive movement fighting to restore balance to the courts,” is demanding that Breyer resign because there’s a difference between “justice” and “social justice.”
We need to start the process of confirming a Black woman justice now.
— Demand Justice (@WeDemandJustice) April 9, 2021
“We are now firmly in the window when past justices have announced their retirement, so it’s officially worrisome that Justice Breyer has not said yet that he will step down. The only responsible choice for Justice Breyer is to immediately announce his retirement so President Biden can quickly nominate the first-ever Black woman Supreme Court justice,” said Brian Fallon, the executive director of Demand Justice and a former top aide to Chuck Schumer.
This push to oust Justice Breyer from the Supreme Court comes at an interesting time because he cautioned last week against packing the court for political gain as many on the far-left are calling for because it could undermine public trust in the court and its decisions.
“I hope and expect that the court will retain its authority,” Breyer said. “But that authority, like the rule of law, depends on trust, a trust that the court is guided by legal principle, not politics. Structural alteration motivated by the perception of political influence can only feed that perception, further eroding that trust.”
The connection between the demand for for Breyer to retire and packing the courts isn’t an accident. Demand Justice is a leading proponent of “reforming” the courts by loading it up with enough justices to guarantee the fundamental transformation of America.
President Biden will form a bipartisan commission to consider term limits and the size of the SCOTUS.
— Brad Beauregard Jr 🇺🇸 (@BradBeauregardJ) April 9, 2021
The plan to hijack the Supreme Court is picking up steam, so much so that Joe Biden announced the formation of a “bipartisan” commission that will perform a 180-day study of potential changes to the Supreme Court, including court packing and setting term limits for justices.
“The Commission’s purpose is to provide an analysis of the principal arguments in the contemporary public debate for and against Supreme Court reform, including an appraisal of the merits and legality of particular reform proposals,” the White House said in a statement. “The topics it will examine include the genesis of the reform debate; the Court’s role in the Constitutional system; the length of service and turnover of justices on the Court; the membership and size of the Court; and the Court’s case selection, rules, and practices.”
As far as “bipartisan” is concerned, the 36-member panel will be led by Bob Bauer, who served as White House counsel for former President Barack Obama, and Cristina Rodriguez, a Yale Law School professor who served as deputy assistant attorney general in the Office of Legal Counsel under the Obama administration.
The social justice warriors at Demand Justice aren’t all that impressed with Biden’s commission because there might be people on it who don’t share their “woke” approach to so-called reform:
After decades of ignorance and indifference concerning liberty, America has become ever more dependent on government, and this has resulted in the creation of a court system that has replaced justice with judicial activism. The abuse of power by the judicial branch of government is destroying the country by emboldening unelected black-robed tyrants to stand above other branches of government—writing laws, instead of judging them.
The Founding Fathers never thought the courts had the final say on every constitutional matter, but it’s clear that Republicans and Democrats believe otherwise. Additionally, they hold the mistaken understanding that the Supreme Court holds an imaginary power to overturn laws passed by state legislatures and/or Congress — a power that’s unassailable by the other branches of government and other courts.
This is the primary reason I wasn’t all that impressed with the “save the courts” promise made by Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell. Arguably, appointments were made to bend the court to the “right,” but they did nothing to return the court to the limits envisioned by the Founding Fathers.
Ironically, the “save the courts” rationale used by Trump and McConnell is the same reasoning being used by Demand Justice and the Far-Left as they try to force the retirement of Justice Breyer from the Supreme Court and increase the number of justices on the bench.
In Thomas Jefferson’s letter to W.C. Jarvis, he warned of the danger we would face if we ever gave the courts the power it now has:
“You seem to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps….
“Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.” (emphasis mine)
Republicans and Democrats in all three branches of government have demonstrated a total disregard and/or ignorance of the Constitution. We need to vigilantly use every tool at our disposal to get rid of these liberty-killing men and women before it’s too late.
David Leach is the owner of the Strident Conservative. He holds people of every political stripe accountable for their failure to uphold conservative values, and he promotes those values instead of political parties.