(SCOTUS members) must be “hyper vigilant to make sure they’re not letting personal biases creep into their decisions, since judges are people, too,” ~ Justice Barrett (9-12-21,University of Louisville).

I completely agree with Justice Barrett about justices putting their politics aside. However, she is violating her own principles.

This supposedly non-partisan speech was given at a clearly political gathering at the McConnell Center at U of L. She was introduced by the Senate Minority leader himself (https://apnews.com/article/health-amy-coney-barrett-courts-coronavirus-pandemic-us-supreme-court-73389c829dc170751a95c5c1d4fc7ca6). This hypocrisy reminds me of her own confirmation process.

In 2016, then majority leader McConnell stated that respected Appellate Court Judge Merrick Garrett, nominated by President Obama, could not even be considered for an appointment to the Supreme Court. McConnell pronounced a new doctrine: that 2016 was an “election year” and whoever the people voted in for President should get to nominate the judge. However, in an extraordinary case of hyper-partisanship, in the election year 2020 McConnell pushed Trump’s nominee through the GOP run Senate … just before the November election that resulted in the Democrats winning the Presidency.

That, my friends, is how we ended up with six conservatives and only three liberals on the Supreme Court … packing SCOTUS via pure politics. And that happened despite the fact that the Democrats have won the popular vote in almost all of the recent Presidential elections (except Trump in 2016 and “W” in 2004). So much for the will of the people.

But now, when the GOP is afraid of Democrats expanding the court from 9 to 15, Barrett says recent court decisions should be regarded as non-partisan. “Just the facts, ma’am, nothing but the facts,” as Detective Jack Webb on his old TV show used to say. Good heavens, does she think we were all born yesterday?

For several decades, the court has been highly politicized, moving more and more to the right (https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/04/does-supreme-court-have-it-democratic-party/ ). In 2000, in a 5-4 decision, SCOTUS chose Bush over Gore. None of the Justices recused themselves, despite the fact that the wives of 2 Justices had actively campaigned for W. Dirty money became the name of the game after the 2010 Citizens United ruling which helped big right wing donors. The ACA was hurt when the Roberts Court decided to remove the penalty on states if they did not expand Medicaid, causing us to have 12 states still refusing a decade later.

The historic Voting Rights Act of 1965 was gutted twice (https://www.vox.com/21211880/supreme-court-chief-justice-john-roberts-voting-rights-act-election-2020 ) by Roberts and friends. Specifically, Shelby County v. Holder (2013) removed the “preclearance” requirement in states that had a history of racially biased voting procedures. It was this decision that directly led to the plethora of voter suppression bills in these very states. A second case decided this year, Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee weakened voting rights even further by giving states more authority to discriminate against minorities (https://time.com/6077449/supreme-court-voting-rights/).

Now we have the undermining of Roe v Wade via SCOTUS’ Texas decision, permitting a clearly unconstitutional ban on abortions after six weeks to be implemented by Texas. Does Barrett seriously believe that the five Justices voting against abortion, all of whom are conservative Catholics, were not influenced by their “personal biases?” Deep down, regardless of her public pronouncements, I doubt she does.

And just wait for the Mississippi abortion case that is coming up soon. These same impartial five judges will put the proverbial nail in the coffin for Roe v Wade.

So much for the concept of “conservative” judges standing by precedent. This “originalist” Supreme Court is obviously a right-wing activist partisan body determined to drive America backwards. And so far, due to the Democrats’ hesitancy to expand the Court, they are obviously succeeding.

Jack Bernard was the first Director of Health Planning for Georgia and served two terms on the Jasper County Board of Health. He retired as a Senior Vice President with a national healthcare corporation. He is now a widely published, nationally known expert on healthcare reform.