Yesterday, Ezra Klein of Vox, who supported the US Supreme Court invalidating the referenda of half the states approved by a majority of voters in each of those states on marriage, declared the Court was becoming anti-democratic. Today, the Editorial Board of the New York Times went with this screed.
In short, Senate Democrats need to use the confirmation process to explain to Americans how their Constitution is about to be hijacked by a small group of conservative radicals well funded by ideological and corporate interests, and what that means in terms of the rights they will lose and the laws that will be invalidated over the next several decades. We’re witnessing right now a global movement against the idea of liberal democracy and, in places like Hungary and Poland, its grounding in an independent judiciary. Mr. Trump and Senate Republicans appear happy to ride this wave to unlimited power. They will almost certainly win this latest battle, but it’s a victory that will come at great cost to the nation, and to the court’s remaining legitimacy. Americans who care about the court’s future and its role in the American system of government need to turn to the political process to restore the protections the new majority will take away, and to create an environment where radical judges can’t be nominated or confirmed. As those tireless conservative activists would be the first to tell you, winning the future depends on deliberate, long-term organizing in the present, even when — especially when — things appear most bleak.
It's only two so far, but the thematic underbelly is the same -- the Supreme Court is suddenly a threat to democracy. Why exactly? Because a conservative majority might actually allow state legislatures to pass laws that have majority support and then stop progressives from going to court to block those democratic actions.
That's what this is about. It is all very Orwellian. The left actually believes it is anti-democratic to have judges who allow the democratic processes to work. They believe it is anti-democratic to have judges who uphold the free exercise and free speech clauses of the first amendment. Let's not forget that last week the New York Times argued the right was weaponizing free speech.
Klein, the New York Times, and more of the left are suddenly singing from the same disingenuous page that the Supreme Court is a threat to democracy if the progressive left cannot control it. It's all very Soviet. And it seems all very coordinated. It's as if there is a list of journalists coordinating their talking points.