BIAS ON THE COURT

Trump Got What He Wanted

When the Supreme Court decided not to consider a lower court ruling against the Louisiana case on abortion clinics in that state, I was very curious to read the dissent written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh. You can read it here.

First, Kavanaugh’s desire to permit a law demanding doctors at three clinics in Louisiana have admitting privileges at local hospitals seems to give hospital boards unusual power over the services that people can get in that state. In fact, a hospital board, always under pressure from local governments to justify expansion and the taking of public lands, does put them in a position to kowtow to the power of local governments. Does Kavanaugh even understand how local governments work?

Next, one of the most glaring aspects of this argument is that if the Court was to say the local law was constitutional, they would be declaring that only one doctor could serve the specific healthcare needs of more than two million women in the state of Louisiana. Is that really in the public interest?

The unnecessary burden on women and their families is obvious, but Kavanaugh focused on whether the other side’s prediction would be found correct. His dissent targets the accuracy of what those who brought the case said, not the incumbrance it would place on those needing the services. It’s a time trip to the 1950s, when mothers had to drive their daughters to another state to receive treatment, which at times did include an abortion. The cost and trauma of such an event was made even worse by arcane laws and policies. Does the Justice really want a return to that?

We’ve learned a lot since the Roe v. Wade. That decision in 1973 decided the issue of the constitutionality of laws that criminalized or restricted access to abortions in the United States. Kavanaugh knows this law and has commented on it. During his confirmation hearings, he said that Roe v. Wade was “stare decisis,” meaning that it was it was decided and is the legal precedent on the matter. If you were opposed to Mr. Kavanaugh’s appointment to the court, you might have believed he said it simply to get the job. If you supported him, you should’ve wanted a decision NOT based on his personal ideology. He wasn’t put on the court to be an objective jurist but rather because he believes that abortion is wrong and that Roe v. Wade was decided incorrectly. So much for stare decisis.

Perhaps this was just a “practice dissent” for the new guy on the court given to him by the Chief Justice. It did little to show his aptitude. If anything, the four-page document exposed him as the ideolog he truly is. Is it the job of the Supreme Court to take away services and clinics for millions of people in any state? Like the similar Texas law, written by the same group, the goal was to deter women’s healthcare businesses from recommending or performing abortions. The Texas law was obsessed with the width of hallways, saying the movement of gurneys and equipment would be thwarted. They were trying to put the clinics out of business and the court saw through that one as well.

I find it distasteful and repulsive that a member of the Supreme Court would use such flawed and suspicious logic to defend a law that could put more people in danger. Did we learn nothing from the back-alley butchers posing as doctors who promised to solve a “problem” for young women but ended up killing them?

The people who work at these clinics are doctors. You may disagree with their viewpoints and claim they are immoral, but you should not have the right to determine the healthcare of any United States citizen. And we should demand that the dissent of a justice quotes law instead of saying the other guys might be lying.

I don’t dislike Brett Kavanaugh because I believed Dr. Blaise Ford more than him, although I was appalled at how he handled the whole matter. I like my judges to be firm but calm. Kavanaugh seemed, and now has proven, that he is too politic to be on the court. His temperament during his confirmation hearing was uncomfortable. I don’t really care if he likes to drink beer but his sense of righteousness was appalling. I feel the same way about Justice Thomas, but it’s too late to impeach him. And unless some sordid facts about Kavanaugh come out, we will have him for the duration of his life.

Voting in America matters. The only way to reshape the court and make it more objective and balanced is to elect a President who promises to do a better job finding smart judges with integrity.

Those on the far left who think Donald Trump’s presidency is an abortion will never understand that politics in Washington is played for the long term, not instant gratification. Those on the far right who keep pushing their agenda of men deciding what women need will never get my vote. Would they trade eliminating the Second Amendment for tearing up Roe v. Wade? No, they wouldn’t. We need a just, objective Supreme Court. It’s time for Trump or hopefully the next President to right the ship.

BRAND NEW BOOK ON AMERICA

Gold, God, Guns & Goofballs shows how we’ve wasted our GOLD on bad wars and corruption. While GOD is there for many people as a spiritual enrichment and the provider of glowing feelings, the truth is just praying and believing will not change our major arc. We don’t determine who gets a GUN. We aren’t sure if we have paramilitary groups ready to storm the White House or a White Castle. There is no control of weapons. The GOOFBALLS with the power constantly try to manipulate us into spending more money on bombs and tanks and wars. When all of our institutions are infected with neglect and fall in disrepair, we will only have ourselves to blame. This book is not an antidote for the left or right, it’s an accelerant to move the middle off their collective asses to go do something positive for America.

 

Get the Kindle Version HERE. Or order your paperback edition HERE.