Respecting the Court: Don’t Become What You Seek to Destroy

[AdSense-A]

By Evan Shelton

Amy Coney Barrett was sworn to the US Supreme Court on October 27, 2020. She emerges as potentially one if the most conservative justices to be appointed to the court in several decades. Even the horrendously flawed Brett Kavanaugh has a more moderate view on a wide range of social issues. But Barrett’s conservatism and the corruption of the court she represents aside, we progressives and moderate democrats must not follow the Republicans down the rabbit hole that is her appointment.

It is very easy to reach for anger following Barrett’s appointment. What she represents is hypocrisy in its most disgusting and blatant form. And while her appointment should prompt Democrats to action, that action must be one of preservation of the court, not corruption of a different kind. If Republicans have forsaken the unbiased intent of the courts, we Democrats must honor that non-partisan goal even more.

That is why I was saddened and little annoyed when I saw my fellow resistors proposing some rather interesting appointments. Now do not get me wrong, Hillary Clinton is brilliant. She truly is. And Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a fierce advocate for progressive values. Both belong in the in the pages of American history and should be remembered for all they have done and will do, to help Americans. With that said, neither should be appointed to the Supreme Court.

Now perhaps these discussions are just the internet being, the internet. Even so, I felt obligated to state something that should be basic. Elected officials should not be appointed to the Supreme Court. The concept is not without precedent. Fifteen Senators and seventeen Representatives have been appointed to the US Supreme Court. However, the last elected official to be appointed to the US Supreme Court was Fred Vinson who was appointed by Truman in 1946. In the modern era the practice of appointing elected officials was abandoned due to the obvious political corruption of the court it implied. The second half of the 20th century and first part of the 21st century brought on a desire to appoint the most experienced available justice.

Obviously, every court appointment is political in concept. Conservative presidents appoint conservative judges and the same is true in reverse. But formal party affiliation has been avoided in attempt to keep the court as unbiased as possible. In theory making decisions based off Constitutional opinions rather than political desires. This unbiased concept of the court is what allows it to function as a proper check and balance for the other two branches of the government. If the court is allowed to become partisan, it will lose the ability to function as intended.

It is easy to see the Republican’s corruption of the courts as a call to match their efforts. However, in doing so we become what we seek to destroy. Democrats must resist this temptation and instead continue to appoint experienced judges with proven track records. Perhaps this desire seems a little “pie-in-the-sky” considering the divisiveness that permeates the country but that is simply not true. Democrats have many options when it coms to experienced candidates for judicial appointments.

A top priority should be the diversification of the courts. America can no longer relay so heavily on white and male judges. Chief Justice Cheri Beasley of North Carolina, a woman of color, has spent 20 years on the bench and is a supporter of guaranteed family leave and the decriminalization of school misconduct. Two things that perhaps sounds obvious but have actually been major controversies within the courts. Not progressive enough for you? Okay, how about Brigitte Amiri. She is the Deputy Director of the ACLU. She has spent a career defending Roe v. Wade and also came in big with her work preventing the Trump administration’s attempted ban on abortion for unaccompanied immigrant minors. Maybe Amiri is not quite moderate enough? Let’s discuss Justice Leondra Kruger who is one of California’s Supreme Court’s Associate Justices. Considered a moderate and often a deciding vote in the state, she penned the prevailing opinion in Barry v. State Bar of California which provided trial attorneys protection from poorly supported bar complaints. Perhaps not a flashy decision but one that is indeed important and highly relevant.

The list of qualified attorneys and judges for court appointments is very long. Considering this and the intense qualifications that these and many other women of color possess, there is really no reason to nominate and appoint elected officials. Democrats can take the high road AND appointment justices that reflect the party’s progressive values. Let us continue to be the party of reason and precedent and not sink to the level of Donald Trump and his Republican stooges. Let our party proceed forward and bring honor to the court by appointing qualified, intelligent and moral justices.

[si-contact-form form=’2′]