1. Understand the war against the Court
In military conflicts, a common strategy is to bomb the adversary's position before an invasion. Elegantly termed "softening up," this tactic weakens fortifications, disrupts communication, and instills chaos in the hearts of the enemy.
Politically, we’re seeing the same strategy used against the Supreme Court.
The Court has always been a battleground for ideological conflict, and recent nominations have reignited the ugliness of the fights against Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas, culminating in the disgraceful "gang rape" (and other) allegations against Justice Kavanaugh.
Yet when the smoke had cleared, liberals had lost their longstanding ideological control of the Court, and it was Donald Trump’s nominees who tipped the balance. Combined with the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the fight to win the Court has gone beyond nomination fights, and the progressive attempts to soften up the Court will continue unabated.
As always, they are turning to their preferred weapon of choice: the media.
We are now witnessing an ongoing effort, driven by a weaponized media, to convince us that the conservative justices are corrupt, and need to be fixed. The National Review editors explain, "That the claims are spurious when not outright farcical is beside the point; the point is to throw enough dust into the air to trigger a 'where there's smoke there must be fire' instinct in low-information voters."
The progressive fantasy is to trigger impeachment, perhaps finally bagging a Clarence Thomas after 32 years. However, their more practical goals are to delegitimize the Court, portraying it as a broken, partisan entity beholden to special interests and in desperate need of reform. That reform, of course, will tip the scales back to their side.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), makes it obvious: "We have seen a steady stream of revelations regarding Supreme Court Justices falling short of the ethical standards expected of other federal judges and public servants. The need for Supreme Court ethics reform is clear, and if the Court does not take adequate action, Congress must."
You'll hear earnest-sounding reforms like term limits, ethics oversight boards, or something that Canada does better than us, as always.
Don't be fooled. These aren't high-minded stands for judicial independence—they're raw political maneuvers masquerading as reform.
2. Dreyfuss rips Oscars’ diversity rules
Actor Richard Dreyfuss slammed the Oscars' new diversity and inclusion standards for the Best Picture category, calling the changes "patronizing" and saying they "make me vomit."
Speaking on PBS' "Firing Line with Margaret Hoover," Dreyfuss argued that art shouldn't be dictated by the latest ideas of morality. The new standards, set to take effect in 2024, require films to meet specific diversity requirements across four categories. He suggested that the standards treat people like children and that history is interesting enough without being manipulated for diversity's sake.
3. Women firefighters start forest fire
A Women-in-Fire Training Exchange program in Banff National Park intended to promote mental health, gender diversity, and inclusion, led to an out-of-control forest fire. It started as a prescribed burn, but residents in surrounding areas were evacuated, and several buildings were damaged.
4. District settles “Jesus Values” discrimination suit
The Washington Elementary School District settled a religious discrimination lawsuit after terminating an 11-year partnership with Arizona Christian University (ACU). The district was accused of impugning ACU's religious rights when board members criticized the university's Christian values. The board has now reinstated the contract with ACU, and the settlement likely includes the district paying thousands in legal fees. Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented ACU, claimed the school board showed "blatant hostility" to the university's beliefs.
Board members, including Tamillia Valenzuela, complained about ACU's "Jesus values" and the impact on LGBTQ students and board members. Valenzuela describes herself as "a bilingual, disabled, neurodivergent Queer Black Latina…” who routinely features her cat ears in her campaign photos.
These assults began under Trump by the Deep State to date
Dems WANT power only & control ONLY
Denigrating democratic institutions like the Supreme Court is harmful, although that criticism is a bit rich coming from Trump-aligned Republicans who've spent the last eight years denigrating every democratic institution they can think of.
The best way to protect the court's integrity is to create accountability for scofflaws like Thomas without fiddling with the court's independence. How about an ethics code similar to those in lower federal courts? The Supreme Court could self-impose that today and head off a lot of this criticism.
And big kudos to ProPublica for unearthing this story. Terrific investigative journalism.