Don’t Rely On Supreme Court to ‘Save’ Conservatism | Beaufort County Now | Josh Hammer writes for the New York Post that conservatives have focused too much attention on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the John Locke Foundation. The author of this post is Mitch Kokai.

    Josh Hammer writes for the New York Post that conservatives have focused too much attention on the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • For decades, conservatives have sought to regain lost culture-war ground through judicial nominations, with GOP voters consistently rating the Supreme Court a higher priority than do Democrats.
  • As the latest high-court term winds down - one featuring a putative 6-3 "conservative" majority - it's worth taking stock of where that project stands. The answer: not in a great place. Consider two of this term's highest-profile cases: California v. Texas (on ObamaCare) and the Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (on religious liberty).
  • In California, a 7-2 majority of Supremes again left former President Barack Obama's signature domestic policy untouched. The court declined to reach the substantive issue - the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Instead, they dismissed the lawsuit brought by Texas and 17 other states on the threshold question of standing - lawyer-speak for a plaintiff's obligation to show a concrete, remediable injury traceable to the defendant's conduct.
  • The technical standing dispute in California is legally debatable: Trump nominee Justice Neil Gorsuch joined Alito's lengthy dissent. Yet Justice Clarence Thomas, who is no less a conservative, joined the majority. Trump's other two nominees, Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, also joined the Justice Stephen Breyer-penned majority opinion.
  • Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats' fear-mongering that a vote to confirm these conservative justices would be a vote to repeal ObamaCare proved pointless - as did conservatives' various litigation campaigns to overturn ObamaCare.
  • In Fulton, meanwhile, a unanimous Court held that Philadelphia authorities violated the First Amendment when they refused to contract with Catholic Social Services for foster care unless it placed kids with gay couples. ...
  • ... But Fulton could, and should, have been so much more. The case represented the court's best chance in years to overrule Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith.
  • That deeply controversial 1990 ruling, from the late Justice Antonin Scalia, upheld "neutral," generally applicable laws so long as they only incidentally curtail religious freedom.
  • Smith was always legally dubious.

Go Back

HbAD0

Latest Op-Ed & Politics

improperly used S corporation to not pay Medicare taxes
after several polls showed a toss up, this is the first to show GOP lead
All you need for life in heaven's grocery store

HbAD1

numerous incidents of bus hijackings lead to migrant escapes
2 Afghans from Biden evac flights charged with child rape, attempted murder in WI
Texas show how to really close a border
China is headed down a dangerous road for its people and America
Debt broken down
Jonathan Davis writes for Trending Politics about a major problem for mainstream media.

HbAD2

There are good citizens and concerned parents (of both races) across the state who are fanatically opposed to CRT being taught in the school system - a school system to which they pay taxes.
Biden admin has an agenda and your health is not part of it

HbAD3

 
Back to Top