Here Are the Final Details Between Colombia and the US Over Deportation Flights
If It Wasn't on HBO, ESPN's Stephen A. Smith Wouldn't Be Invited Back...
The Manic Buckshot Presidency
WH Hails Capturing Top Illegal Immigrant Criminals and It's Monumental
How RFK Jr. Plans to Tackle the Opioid Crisis
Trump Releases Weapons Biden Withheld From Israel
NYC Sees First Five-Day Period in 30 Years With No Shooting Victims
Federal Worker Slams Trump’s Executive Order: 'It’s Making My Job Harder'
How JD Vance Was the Man Behind the J6 Pardons
JD Vance's First Interview as VP Is Brilliant
UPDATE: Colombia President Backs Down After Trump Threatens Nation for Rejecting Deportati...
Under Trump’s 'One Flag Policy,' Only Old Glory Takes the Spotlight
Trump Brings Back Mexico City Policy
Bishop Who Rebuked Trump During National Prayer Launches Liberal Media Blitz
Trump Keeps Major Campaign Trail Promise
Tipsheet

Those Looking to Force A Supreme Court Justice to Retire Just Got Some Unwelcome News

AP Photo/Mark Tenally

For months, far-left activist groups have tried to force Justice Stephen Breyer into retirement. On Friday, though, with the Supreme Court's having come to an end, it looks like the justice may be sticking around for a little while longer.

Advertisement

On Wednesday, The Washington Post published Paul Waldman's opinion column, "Stephen Breyer is making a strong case for Supreme Court term limits." Waldman's headline tells us all we need to know about his viewpoint on the matter; in fact, his arguments are pretty lousy. They're nothing new and Waldman barely puts in any effort, if he does at all, to defend them.

Democrats seem to be petrified that when it's time to replace Breyer, their party will no longer control the Senate, and, should he be the Senate majority leader when the time comes, Mitch McConnell will be running the show to make things difficult for the Democrats. McConnell has already indicated he will likely not allow Biden to fill a Supreme Court vacancy in 2024, should that come about in a time of ivided government.

Waldman in particular is so frantic that he can't see how seriously McConnell has taken his role and the Senate's role of advice and consent when his party is in control. 

It's because of their desperation that Democrats are insisting that the rules be changed. It's likely they would welcome one, a mix of, or all of the examples of court packing, Breyer announcing his retirement, or term limits. 

Advertisement

Here's how Waldman dismissively wrote about Breyer:

Breyer hasn’t said anything publicly about his own retirement, but in a recent speech, he said that judges “are loyal to the rule of law, not to the political party that helped to secure their appointment” and warned against what might happen “if the public sees judges as politicians in robes.”

You can see that as a heartwarmingly idealistic view of what the judiciary ought to be, or a dangerously naive view of what the judiciary has already become. The truth is that the court is unavoidably political even if it is not partisan in every case. Politicians — especially the presidents who appoint judges and the senators who vote to confirm them — certainly see a judge’s party identity as essential to how they’ll rule on the court. And the public thinks so too.

Clearly Justice Breyer is aware of this all on his own. He doesn't need overzealous activist and activist groups reminding him of what's at stake. It's entirely possible it has backfired, especially when every move the justice has made is analyzed as if were his last while on the Court.

Demand Justice was silent over Twitter on Friday when it came to Breyer's increasingly unlikely retirement. The group did still issue their routine and ridiculous calls for court packing.

Advertisement

Someone who not silent, however, was Ben Mathias-Lilley in writing up Slate's "The Surge," which describes itself as "a weekly ranking of the most important people aged 80 and above whose health is absolutely critical to the Democratic Party’s agenda!"

Predictably, Justice Breyer is at the top of the list, "who, as of this writing, is, crucially, still a Supreme Court justice and not a soon-to-be-ex-Supreme Court Justice."

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement