WASHINGTON (AP), Three Supreme Court justices made the same plea in quick succession in recent days. Don't consider justices politicians.
There are reasons to be worried about the justices. Recent polls indicate a sharp decline in support for a court dominated by conservatives.
Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer, and Amy Coney Barrett have urged the public to not view court decisions as a continuation of partisan politics. The timing of these comments is important, as they come just after a summer when conservative majority on the court prevailed against liberal dissents on immigration, abortion, and evictions and at the beginning of a blockbuster term.
Already, the future of abortion rights as well as expansions of gun- and religious rights are on the agenda. There could be other contentious cases. Each case could lead to a split in the court, with six conservative justices elected by Republican presidents winning over three liberal justices nominated from Democrats.
Some observers believe that the Supreme Court faces the greatest threat to its legitimacy since Bush v. Gore, two decades ago. This decision split conservatives from liberals and settled the 2000 presidential election in favor Republican George W. Bush.
We may be at a turning point, I believe. Irv Gornstein is the executive director of Georgetown University's Supreme Court Institute. He said that if we see right-side rulings over left-side disagreements on all the most divisive issues of our times, the court's perception may be permanently altered.
Paul Smith, who represented LGBTQ rights and voting rights before the court, stated that people are becoming more upset at the fact that the court is not in the American people's best interests on many issues.
However, views of the court have fallen before and then rebounded due to a public that isn't paying enough attention to the work of the courts and can't identify most of the justices.
Continue the story
Tom Goldstein, who founded the court-focused SCOTUSblog site and argues regularly before the justices every day, doesn't think this time will be any different. He said that the court has "built up an immense font of public respect, regardless of what it does."
However, Thomas, Breyer, and Barrett took aim in interviews and speeches at the perception that the court was political.
Breyer, at 83, is the oldest member of the court and the leader of the diminished liberal wing. He has long spoken out about the danger that the court could be viewed as a junior league politician.
He acknowledged that it is difficult to counter the perception judges act politically. This was especially true after Texas's case in which the court voted 5-4 to reject the state ban on abortions in the first trimester. The majority consisted of three justices who were appointed by President Donald Trump, along with two conservatives. Chief Justice John Roberts was the dissenting member.
Breyer, in an interview with The Washington Post earlier this month, stated that it is hard to believe that cases like these are more divided than you might imagine.
Barrett soon followed Breyer's lead.
I want to convince you today that this court does not consist of a bunch partisan hackers," Trump's nominee stated in a talk in Louisville Kentucky at a center named after Senator Republican leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky. He was sitting near the justice.
McConnell orchestrated Barrett's quick confirmation days before the last year's presidential election, and less than a month after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died. Barrett's confirmation was undoubtedly the most politically-minded of all court members. Her confirmation was voted 52 to 48, which is the first time in modern times that she received no support from the minority party.
McConnell's determination to confirm Barrett just days before the election was in direct contrast to his decision not to keep open the seat that Justice Antonin Scalia held when Scalia, a Democrat died, and President Barack Obama sought to replace him.
Thomas made a brief appearance just days after Barrett's. He said that the court's perceptions were being distorted by the justices taking over roles that should belong to elected officials. He said that the court was considered the least dangerous and that we might have become the most hazardous at the University of Notre Dame where Barrett taught law for many decades.
Three polls conducted following the Texas abortion vote have revealed sharp declines in support for the court. According to the Gallup poll, only 40% of Americans approve the court. This is the lowest approval rating since Gallup began asking this question over 20 years ago. In July, approval was 49%.
Liberal interest groups have called for an expansion of the court and term limits to ensure justices who are granted lifetime tenure by the Constitution, are affected by the changes in the composition and controversies surrounding Trump's nominees.
These changes are unlikely to succeed at the moment. Demand Justice, however, stated this week that it will spend more than $100,000 advertising over the next few weeks to promote the idea for court expansion. A court reform commission, established by President Joe Biden, is expected to release a report in November.
Some court-watchers believe that the actions of the courts are more responsible for changing the views of the justices than the efforts of liberal groups.
Roman Martinez, a Washington attorney who regularly appears before the court, stated that I believe there is a campaign to delegitimize it.
Most justices have spoken at one time or another about the importance for the court to remain legitimate and the need to elevate justices above partisanship.
Each and every one of us must recognize the value of the court's legitimacy. We don't have an army, but you also know that. We don't have any money. We can't get people to do what our ideas should, but people must respect us, Justice Elena Kagan stated at a Princeton University event during Kavanaughs confirmation.
Roberts spoke out a few months later to defend judicial independence. However, he did this to counter criticisms from Trump. Roberts and Trump had a memorable tussle after Trump called a judge who ruled against them a biased Obama judge.
Roberts stated that there are no Obama judges, Trump judges, Bush judges, or Clinton judges. We have an extraordinary group dedicated judges who do their best to give equal rights to all those they are presenting before them.
