How many times in recent years have we been told that the Constitution of the United States has long been outdated, is too simplistic to guide modern-day America, is racist or bigoted because it was written by “old” white men — incorrect; the founders were young white men — and should be dissolved, and replaced by a new, “more fair” document by which to rule America and our daily lives? Too many times to count.
Welp, add The New York Times to the list of left-wing institutions promoting all of the above.
In a Friday Times essay, two Ivy League professors declared the “broken” and “famously undemocratic” U.S. Constitution “stands in the way” of “real” freedom and democracy, while issuing a call to “radically alter the basic rules of the game” by no longer requiring us to “justify our politics by the Constitution.”
When liberals lose in the Supreme Court they usually say that the justices got the Constitution wrong. That's a dead end, say @samuelmoyn and @rddoerfler. https://t.co/oJeWhXM4C5
— New York Times Opinion (@nytopinion) August 19, 2022
The essay, titled The Constitution Is Broken and Should Not Be Reclaimed, written by law professors Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale, claimed that when liberals “lose in the Supreme Court” they often blame justices for misreading the Constitution.”
So, declared the duo: “Struggling over the Constitution has proved a dead end.” Translation: “Dissolve the Constitution and let us behave as radically as we choose to behave, justice be damned.”
Stop the tape.
While these two denizens of the no-longer-hallowed halls of academia got it right in the sense that the left whines when SCOTUS strikes down laws, executive actions, and so forth that run counter to their leftist agenda and ideologies, the first thing they do is blame the Court itself, which is not dissimilar to the Democrats’ call for the elimination of the “antiquated” Electoral College in 2016, solely because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by some three million ballots but decisively lost the Electoral College vote.
Shoe on the other foot test time, my liberal friends:
If the 2016 election results had been flipped, with Trump winning the popular vote and Hillary winning the EC vote, would Democrats have histrionically howled at the moon over the “antiquated” Electoral College in that case? Of course, not. And if the Supreme Court had upheld Roe, would the Democrats still be calling for packing the Court? In this case, yes — because conservative justices are theoretically in the majority, but if left-wing activist judges were in the majority, would the Democrats still be calling for packing the court to make things more “fair”? Again, a rhetorical question.
Dismissing the official framework of the government of the United States, which was ratified on June 21, 1788, as “inadequate” and “famously undemocratic,” the Ivy Leaguers wondered “aloud” why progressives bother to “justify our politics by the Constitution or by calls for some renovated constitutional tradition.”
There it was; an open, honest declaration of what the left is really after in 21st century America.
As Doerfler and Moyn wrote, “The real need is not to reclaim the (“centuries-old text” of the) Constitution, “as many would have it, but instead to reclaim America from constitutionalism.” They also claimed that constitutions in principal, “especially the broken one we have now,” direct us to the past, something that “aids the right” which tends to stick “with what it claims to be the original meaning of the past.”
“It would be far better,” they opined, “if liberal legislators could simply make a case for abortion and labor rights on their own merits without having to bother with the Constitution.”
On “their” own merits? So should Republican lawmakers, when in the majority, be able to make cases for conservative agendas, without “having to bother with the Constitution”? Of course not; these clowns and the rest of the left wouldn’t accept that deal in a million years.
Though liberals have attempted to “reclaim” the Constitution for half a century, these guys argued, the left claims it has “agonizingly little to show for it,” while calling to “radically alter the basic rules of the game.”
Poor spoiled babies.
“Reclaim” is an interesting word choice by the far left, don’t you think? Particularly given the Court’s 5-4 majority decision to overturn Roe v. Wade did precisely that. Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett did not “get it wrong” in June; they corrected the wrong Roe decision by the Court in 1973 by returning to the states and their respective elected lawmakers the right do decide abortion-related issues.
The bottom line:
The above tripe is nothing more than irresponsible, though completely predictable, left-wing groupspeak; The U.S. Constitution is the last defense against tyranny and the theft of the rights of the American people.
These people will never settle until they destroy America as we know it. Via Congress and the White House, the U.S. Constitution, or ultimately, whatever it takes, we must not allow fascism to succeed.
Story cited here.
