Damn Right I'm Angry

 John Roberts wants everyone to respect “his” Supreme Court and specifically wants the liberal justices to refrain from criticizing rulings coming from the conservative supermajority, of which he is a part. John, buddy, ain’t gonna happen. SCOTUS under your leadership seems hell bent on returning the United States to a time when women were not supposed to be seen outside the kitchen or the nursery, when Jim Crow laws were rampant, when gays were criminals who ought to be extirpated (or at least kept in a closet), and when corporations and the plutocrats running them were free to plunder and pollute without any checks or balances.

You and your ilk have manufactured doctrines from whole cloth for decades now. The ideas of “textualism” and “originalism” are bandied about as though Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, and the other Founders were forever locked in place and could only be interpreted through the lens of 1790, a time when the first census showed a population of 3,929,214 (and that excluded the Original Peoples who were here long before the arrival of whites) and that census asked six questions, one of which was “How many slaves do you own?”. Led by Antonin Scalia, that set of ideas now counts six members of SCOTUS, whom one presumes they commune with on their off-hours. We are now a nation of 331,449,281 as of the 2020 census with issues and problems that old Ben Franklin could not have dreamed of. Ever the pragmatist, he would have wanted to look at those problems through the latest lens, not through his crude bifocals.

Decisions within the last year regarding dealing with Clean Air and Clean Water were made based in part on the “major questions” doctrine. This is the idea that federal agencies must have explicit guidance from Congress to act before making and enforcing regulatory decisions. Let's think about that. Congress generally writes laws that have vagueness firmly baked into them, in large part because Congress cannot give explicit guidance for everything and because Congress lacks expertise in so many areas that the guidance they would issue would be suspect in any case. The result is generally lawsuits alleging an overstep by a regulatory agency (part of the Executive Branch). But where do the experts in government reside? Why, in the regulatory agencies. The result is that dealing with things like the environment and climate change never happens because corporate lawsuits intervene and a sympathetic SCOTUS agrees with the corporations. Several days ago the “major questions” decision was invoked to end relief for student loans, even though Congress granted such authority (but again, too vaguely for Roberts’ court) in the law.

But there is worse afoot. SCOTUS decreed that a web designer in Colorado could refuse service to LGBTQ+ clients who sought her services because, as a devout Christian she was afraid that providing such service would demean her religious liberty. However, the man she says made such a request adamantly denies he made such a request; further, he is married (to a woman), has children, and the plaintiff in the case provided the email after filing the case. In short, it looks like Lorie Smith really has no standing to bring the case at all and indeed she and her lawyers could be liable for bringing a false case before the Supreme Court. In the meanwhile, the rights of LGBTQ+ people across the nation have taken a hit in the name of… what, exactly? 

So, Mr. Chief Justice, I think you can kiss a solid goodbye to the idea that your legacy as Chief Justice will be much more than the legacy of the 45th president. And besides, you may have noticed that you, Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Barrett, and Kavanaugh have racked up enough scandal to last the Judicial Branch for another century. But we’ll save that for another time.