OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.
Former Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is defending the court after attacks have come against it following its ending of Roe V Wade abortion protections, making it a state issue.
The retired liberal Justice spoke with Chris Wallace for his new HBO Max show “Who’s Talking To Chris Wallace” when the host mentioned the subject.
“I want to talk to you about public opinion. You like to quote Alexander Hamilton, who said that the court does not have purse like Congress, does not have the sword like the executive. That it depends on public acceptance for its authority. You talked earlier about public opinion. Look at the Gallup poll, which has measured approval of the courts since the year 2000. In July, the month after Dobbs, 43% approved of the way the Supreme Court does its job while 55% disapprove. That’s the most negative margin in the history of the court, worse than right after Bush v. Gore. You talk about social harmony, but when the court undoes a right that people have lived with for half a century, doesn’t that very much shake the authority of the court?” the host said.
“If you’re going to be a judge, you do not worry about popularity. You do not worry about what the general public will say by way of public opinion. And if you do that going over a very small edge here, people won’t accept your opinion. They’ll think you’re a group of politicians and there have been some bad days in the history of the court. And I start complaining about the ones that I didn’t like, I think you know what Abraham Lincoln said, when he read Dred Scott. He said, That’s a shocker. And you say did I like this Dobbs decision? Of course I didn’t. Of course I didn’t. Was I happy about it? Not for an instant. Did I do everything I could to persuade people? Of course, of course. But there we are and now we go on. We try to work together. I mean, it’s a little corny, but I think, but I do think it,” the former Justice said.
— Brianna Keilar (@brikeilarcnn) September 23, 2022
The Supreme Court is set to be back to work in October and one case that it has agreed to hear has many waiting in anticipation.
The case is to decide if Republican legislators from North Carolina GOP have the authority to draw a partisan election map and not have state judges interfering.
“The decision could impact future congressional and presidential elections. The high court will take up the case when its next term begins in October,” the report stated.
“The case of Moore vs. Harper, asks the court to uphold the concept – known as the independent state legislature theory – that state legislators have the sole and independent authority to set rules for. North Carolina GOP House Speaker Timothy Moore asked the high court to consider the case on appeal of his own state Supreme Court’s decision earlier this year to strike down the theory relating to a gerrymandering case,” it added.
“In an election case out of North Carolina, SCOTUS agrees to review the “independent state legislature” theory next term. Under that theory, state legislatures have broad power to set rules for federal elections, even if state courts say those rules are unconstitutional,” SCOTUS Blog said.
“The North Carolina election case is Moore v. Harper. SCOTUS also adds two other new cases to its docket for next term: Percoco v. U.S. (a case about honest-services fraud brought by a former Andrew Cuomo aide) and Ciminelli v. U.S. (a case about federal wire fraud),” it said.
“In addition to those three grants, SCOTUS declines review in a challenge to New York’s vaccine mandate for health care workers,” it said.