Radical Judgment in a Radical Era
Shattered case law is characteristic of this era.
Recall that the era is indelibly marked by the influence of former President Donald Trump. He appointed three of the five judges, who make up the majority, to lead an era in which unthinkable events became visible on a daily basis.
This is what we don't know: how a society that is already under radical tide reacts to this new instigation of cultural wars in Washington and dozens of state capitals. mosquito. After all, it is the nature of the radical moment that the old assumptions are overturned and the familiar signposts are irrelevant.
Radical words may seem like strong words, but here we just mean them in clinical terms. It is neither a derogatory nor a praise. Indeed, those who support the end of theRoe v. Wade case, like those who lament it, decide even if Arito claims it as a purely rational conclusion of legal logic. You must admit that you have a breathtaking personality. The case-based legal system determined that this particular case was invalid, with a narrow majority made possible by a combination of partisan calculations and the chance of chance when a particular justice died. So it is also a right that has existed for half a century and influences the most intimate areas of human life.
The specific moment a decision was made made it possible to see its impact more clearly and as part of a larger whole. This was an amazing decision, and at the end of the week, the public learned amazing things about what happened at the end of the Trump administration.
In January 2021, when President Joe Biden took office, the six years that Trump ruled American politics (two candidates and four presidents) ended in an orderly manner. It looked like I was greeted. Trump may have personally broken the barriers of habit and politeness through eccentric rhetoric and behavior. But the larger political system looked intact and almost intact. He is now the former president and has lost his credibility in his role in facilitating his loss and the January 6 riots.
In fact, it is only after Trump resigns that he can clearly see how he broke the barriers of the entire American regime.Roe v. WadeThe end of the case is part of his legacy. So there is a historical precedent that the president gracefully leaves power when the winner is legally declared.
Reality is shattered and precedent is characteristic of this era. Friday's Supreme Court ruling is a convenient opportunity to look back on everything you might have once thought "never happen", but it's actually happened in recent years. Or think of what you expected to happen. It's about how the American political system works, because it didn't happen in the end.
Indeed, Senate opposition will not block the presidential candidate to the Supreme Court to fill a vacancy that occurred almost a year before the president's term ended. .. It works. But of course, that was how it worked in 2016. So Trump's choice of Neil Gorsuch voted to abolishRoeinstead of Barack Obama's choice of Merrick Garland.
Indeed, the Supreme Court never decides on a polarized social issue with a 5-4 vote. That's exactly what we're doing now. It will be difficult to reach a unanimous decision, just as the 1954Brown v. Board of Educationdecision ends the separation. was decided in 1973. Except that it no longer works. Judge John Roberts' petition for a narrower ruling at the Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health Organizationwas despised by a conservative colleague who felt that five votes were sufficient.
Indeed, the Supreme Court's deliberations are treated with respect. Therefore, the draft opinion will not be leaked. But in this case, they did. This is the first time in the modern history of an institution. When it comes to institutions, certainly proud members of the House of Representatives have more loyalty to the effective work of the institution and the constitutional government than to parties from party to president. Will have That's why Richard Nixon accepted his fate in Watergate and was forced to resign just a year after the firstRoedecision. So far, that's not what's happening to this generation of Republicans in Congress. Most of them have turned on Trump even after this week's revelations on how he tried to get his Justice Department involved to make false claims of election fraud in his desperate bid 2020 Inaugurated after losing the election of the year.
These are all currencies of no value in modern politics.
This is especially true for the question of what will happen next. Many political analysts predict that court decisions will activate progressives in ways that could help Democrats, ultimately leading to the loss of abortion rights in a judicial defeat restored by political victories. doing. Sounds plausible to me. But it's worth asking how many analysts predicted Trump's victory in 2016, or how many analysts predicted to increase his total votes in 2020.
Even the majority of the Supreme Court disagrees with what Trump did. In Arito's opinion, it has no effect on gay marriage, the right to contraception, or any other judgment that relies on some of the same legal reasons as theRoe v. Wade case. However, Judge Clarence Thomas has issued a consensus opinion that, in his opinion, all these cases should also be subject to review.
So far, the majority of the Supreme Court has made the radical decision it wanted. And the reality is that radical times lead to unpredictable results.