If I’m the one breaking this to you, please… sit down (or not, depending on your political leanings)… but Ruth Bader Ginsberg has died at the age of 87. And of course, those on the left are beside themselves, not because they had a personal affection for the late Supreme Court justice, but because Trump now has the opportunity to nominate her successor.
And so he did on September 26, 2020, with the announcement that he has picked Amy Coney Barrett to fill the SCOTUS seat.
Predictably, the left has expressed itself in ways that would embarrass a first-grader. Here are just a few examples:
Even though the reactions are juvenile, bordering on psychotic, it’s not hard to understand why the outrage. With her confirmation, Bennett would tip the Supreme Court even further toward a more conservative, constitutional bias (although John Roberts – Chief Supreme Court Justice and George W. Bush’s nominee because of his presumed conservative ruling precedence – has, time and again, favored more “interpretive” constitutional rulings… so what does that really mean?).
But let’s dive deeper. It’s not just the fear that Barrett’s appointment will mean the sudden death of Roe v. Wade – it’s the power of the position she could very well hold in the coming weeks. And this is the real issue with regard to the Supreme Court.
Imagine – five unelected, unaccountable, well-connected lawyers with lifetime political appointments have the power to make national law for 330 million people. “But there are NINE justices,” you might say. Yes, but it only takes a majority to make a decision in a case brought before the SCOTUS. So in essence, it’s five.
That’s a hell of a lot of power for five flawed human beings to hold. If Barrett is who conservatives hope she is, she could help neuter many of the laws and policies progressives have worked decades to enact. Imagine thinking that abortion is the end-all, be-all of women’s “health” and “reproductive rights.” Now imagine with a 5-4 vote, it is no longer legal on a national level (what no one wants to admit is that it wouldn’t be illegal – the matter would simply go to the states, who would vote to keep it legal or not). That’s a hell of a prospect.
Why live like that? Why invest so much emotion in an issue that could be overturned overnight by five people you didn’t help elect and then scream at those whose political ideology favors the reversal? It’s not hyperbole to say that if Roe v. Wade is reversed, this is going to cause a great deal of anguish for millions of people.
There’s a better solution: peaceful separation. Decentralizing the U.S.A. is the best way to ensure that whatever society you migrate to based on shared culture, values, and goals will enact policies you favor. If you want to keep abortion legal (and provided on demand) you can have it in your new political system without the stress of knowing there’s a large voting base that is vehemently opposed to it (and vice versa for the other side of the issue).
It’s a better way. It’s something we should all desire and advocate.
Recent Comments