The US Supreme Court could lose legitimacy if it loses touch with public sentiment

| July 23, 2022

Justice Elena Kagan, one of the liberal justices on the US Supreme Court, said that the court must act like a court if it is to maintain legitimacy. She also argued that the justices need to be consistent when applying their judicial philosophies, even if that consistency goes against their desired outcome. Justice Kagan was one of the justices that dissented the recent abortion ruling.

From Reuters:

“I’m not talking about any particular decision or even any particular series of decisions, but if over time the court loses all connection with the public and with public sentiment, that’s a dangerous thing for a democracy,” Kagan said at a judicial conference in Montana.

The court, America’s top judicial body, has a 6-3 conservative majority that has boldly asserted its power in the abortion ruling and other recent cases.

“Overall, the way the court retains its legitimacy and fosters public confidence is by acting like a court, is by doing the kinds of things that do not seem to people political or partisan,” added Kagan, who has served on the court since 2010.

Kagan, who dissented in the abortion case along with the two other liberal justices, added that the court “earns its legitimacy by what it does, by the way it behaves.”

She said there have been times in history when the court has been “unconstrained and undisciplined” when justices “really just attempted to basically enact their own policy or political or social preferences” and said the current justices should guard against that.

Kagan also said justices have to be consistent when implementing their judicial philosophies and cannot abandon that approach when it will not result in their preferred outcome.

Opinion polls have shown a drop in public approval of the court in the wake of the abortion ruling, which capped its blockbuster term that ended last month. In other rulings, the court bolstered gun rights, expanded religious rights and curbed the ability of President Joe Biden’s administration to issue broad regulations aimed at reducing carbon emissions from existing coal- and gas-fired power plants.

Beter to lose public confidence for abiding by the Constitution rather than losing public confidence for not abiding by the Constitution. Reuters has more information here.

Category: SCOTUS, Society

57 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Atlanticcoast63

….My response to Madam Justice Kagan is this: if you had to take an unpopular case to a judge who publicly acknowledged that they factored public opinion into their rulings, how confident would you be of justice?

Hack Stone

In other words, give in to the mob mentality regardless whether it is legal or moral.

A Proud Infidel®™

Well, IMHO she WAS chosen because her handlers knew that she’d be a loyal hack to the liberal agenda.

Hack Stone

Don’t drag Hack’s good name into this.

KoB

I’d be curious to see where they getting these opinion polls from. In my opinion the SCOTUS is FINALLY doing their job and abidding by what is in the Constitution and the laws of the land.

QMC

Maybe “public sentiment” is referred to in the polling conducted in San Francisco, NY, DC, Portland, Boston, and LA.

Mason

I believe it’s those with the pitchforks and torches in fiery but mostly peaceful insurrections.

QMC

“CNN. The most trusted name in news.”

Stephen

You mean the majority of Americans ? Not uneducated, old, white boomers who never left their hometown aka the cancer generation?

Anonymous

Kagan wasn’t picked for her brains. (All SCOTUS does is say whether or not a law agrees with the Constitution– there are two other branches for popular input.)

Last edited 2 years ago by Anonymous
MustangCryppie

This is the same argument that the Catholic church needs to readjust its beliefs to today’s reality. If that happens, it ceases to be the RC church.

rgr1480

I miss Benedict XVI ….

Hate_me

That ship sailed with Vatican II, and many other times throughout the last 1500 years.

The reality is that true religion will always be integrated into modern society.

Ordering abstention from eating meat on Fridays, to prop up a flagging fishing industry has more to do with keeping the economy vibrant than with any moral objective. Likewise, accepting prayer or charity in lieu of such (outside of Lent), is about loosening restraints to retain membership when the economics are more conducive.

It’s a different matter when the Church abandons its own principles and starts to sanction divorce, gay marriage, abortion, etc.

I’m all for gay marriage from a legal and national perspective, but I cannot support any law that insists the Catholic Church (or any individual) must recognize such a union as legitimate; nor could I respect any Catholic priest who performs such a ceremony in the name of the Church.

George V

It’s just amazing how liberals & progressives can speak like this and not be aware of behavior of fellow politicians.

“…there have been times in history when the court has been “unconstrained and undisciplined” when justices “really just attempted to basically enact their own policy…”

This sounds to me like what the Roe V. Wade decision was.

NDHoosier

…among other decisions….

Tallywhagger

Kind of reminds of Cher’s daughter but with brains. Definitely better qualified for the court than that nasty wise Latina.

The incoming little freak who cannot tell a male from a female should be a present reminder of just how degenerate Joe Biden is.

No one ever accused Joe of being a lawyer, beyond the school who matriculated him and perhaps the Commonwealth of Delaware… shameless as they are.

AW1Ed

Love him or loathe him, Trump is responsible for the outbreak of Constitutionalism in SCOTUS.

Mason

It is refreshing to see Republican-appointed justices actually doing the job like they said they would.

AW1Ed

Fukkin-Aye!

Anonymous

Hell yeah!

Stephen

That’s what civil war is for and being an old, fat and ignorant minority isn’t a good start son

AW1Ed

Pro tip, Stevie. Stay on the current page for maximum exposure. Only reason I know you’re here, I approved your brain dead comments.

Been a while since we had a decent chew toy around here. Maybe now you’ll get noticed.

Graybeard

Justice Elena Kagan is blatantly advocating rule by fiat rather than rule by law.

She is plainly pushing toward tyranny.

Anonymous

Dictatorship of the proletariat… clearly a popular thing, eh? (Soviets always claimed it was.)

Stephen

That’s why trump suck putins left one and praised his invasion? This is why boomers are a dying breed. Darwinism

BlueCord Dad

This is what you get when you appoint someone to the highest court in the land(looking at you 44) who was never a judge. She’s got a JD from Harvard Law and was Solicitor General of the United States

Mason

I saw that headline earlier and rolled my eyes. Another leftist judicial activist that doesn’t understand the role of the courts. The whole reason federal judgeships are lifetime appointments (and ostensibly non-partisan) was to prevent public sentiment from swaying their decisions.

Hack Stone

Still trying to figure out the purpose of the incessant protests outside of the homes of conservative Justices. The ruling has been made, and regardless, Supreme Court decisions, and all court decisions, should be free from threats and intimidation from outside influence.

Deckie

And in the wake of all that the left leaning states pretend it’s an act of defiance against the Supreme Court by exercising their rights.

Ned Lamont’s inane advertisements here in CT come to mind…

Stephen

Because partisan traitors who want to interfere inside Americans home get karma. Typical republican crying when he gets a reaction

Trent

Oh, she understands it all to well. She chooses to ignore it.

Skivvy Stacker

Reminds me of the time about 15 years ago when I met a young lady running for state senate in Minnesota. She actually said that; “we should look to foreign laws to help determine the direction of our future laws in this country”.
As I recall, she didn’t win her bid for office.
We already have a blue print by which we help determine the future laws of this country, and it’s known as the Constitution.

Stephen

And boomers piss on it daily. Thank God at an average age of 65, most will be gone within 10 years

timactual

I guess Kagan would have voted with the majority in Plessy v. Ferguson, because “separate but equal” racial segregation was public preference back then.

NDHoosier

Don’t forget Dred Scott v. Sandford

Anonymous

And Brown vs. Board of Ed…

Hack Stone

Seems that “separate but equal” is making a comeback at government funded institutions of higher education. We need to set aside housing, rec centers and eating establishments for “People Of Color” because they do not feel safe around white people. Setting aside those same facilities for white people who don’t want to interact with “POC’s” would be racist.

A Proud Infidel®™

The same people who set “safe spaces” aside in kolledges for the snowflakes to “escape” from things that “offend” them and immerse themselves in coloring books.

5JC

I think she got all of that backwards.

Anonymous

Well, she’s a left/libtard, so…

rgr769

I suppose if Kagan was a circuit judge riding circuit in the Old West and a horse thief was locked in the town jail with 60% of the town wanting him hung immediately, Kagan would order the sheriff to turn him over to the lynch mob.

5JC

Let’s suppose we don’t know if he stole the horse or not but he is black so 80% of the mob wants him hung. He is found not guilty at trial and the judge lets him go. A riot ensues.

Which is the most logical thing to do? Not that anything like this could ever happen.

A. The governor sends in a Texas Ranger to try to quell the mob.

B. The mayor organizes a hanging party.

C. Have a new trial in a different town with the same result.

D. Judge orders him hung because public opinion is in favor of it.

rgr769

That works. A little more complex. But with the same “equitable” result, which is what is important to progs.

Smitty

Connection with the public” says the daughter of a Jewish lawyer, who went to Princeton, Oxford, and Harvard. What does she know about America, beyond the east coast? Same for many of the others, except Thomas. Not much diversity there.

STSC(SW/SS)

Congress lost public sentiment a long time ago so I guess they are illegitimate.

NHSparky

Yeah, cause fuck the rule of law. Dred Scott, Plessy vs Ferguson, and Korematsu were based on public sentiment.
Jesus she’s an idiot.

UpNorth

I think you’re giving Kagan way too much credit, referring to her as an idiot.

Anonymous

Yes, it insults idiots.

Devtun

Yeah, the US of A dodged a yuge disaster in Nov 2016 w/ Trump eking out a victory for the WH. Prez Hildebeast would have gotten two immediate picks for Justices. One for Scalia & another for Ginsburg who no doubt would have announced her retirement. Thank teh lord, and pass the ammo.

Old tanker

This sounds exactly like the court that GAVE the country the roe vs wade debacle that took over 50 years to correct.

“She said there have been times in history when the court has been “unconstrained and undisciplined” when justices “really just attempted to basically enact their own policy or political or social preferences” and said the current justices should guard against that.”

26Limabeans

“Democrats are Communists”

Enter that statement into a browser and notice the many
results that agree with it. I am glad to be elderly and will not
have to suffer the coming demise of Freedom and Liberty.
If the Democrats win in 2014 America is over and the only way
it will come back is through armed revolution.