Far left to Dems: ‘Don’t give away stolen seat’ on Sup. Court


When Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement, one headline declared that liberals were in “meltdown,” but there may be no better gauge of how the Far Left is planning to fight than an alert from a group calling itself Seattle Indivisible, which is demanding that Senate Democrats “Don’t Give Away the Stolen Seat.”

Who stole Kennedy’s seat? The 81-year-old jurist is entering into a well-deserved retirement. Nobody is making him do that.

The retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy has set off a frenzy among liberals. (Screen capture, YouTube, CBS News)

But is this a myth that the Far Left is trying to create; the impression that the nation’s high court is being ripped off? It would be because, for the first time in memory, the court might take a slightly more conservative course. Liberals immediately began screaming about the demise of Roe v. Wade—CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said it is “doomed”—reversal of gay rights, and how the Supremes, with Kennedy casting the swing vote, just upheld President Donald Trump’s travel ban and handed public employee unions – and Democrat politicians who have benefitted – a loss with the Janus ruling. Public employees can no longer be required to contribute to those unions, which traditionally back Democrats, as noted by the Seattle P-I.com.

Here’s what Seattle Indivisible recommends: Call liberal U.S. Senators Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray, both Democrats, with the following message:

“My name is… and I am a constituent in … Now that Justice Kennedy has announced that he is retiring, I am frightened by the prospect of a Supreme Court with majority conservative Justices. The stakes could not be higher, and everyone on Trump’s short list for the nomination is unacceptable. I would like (You)to make a public statement committing to vote against everyone currently on Trump’s short list for the Supreme Court.”

Apparently, the liberal group doesn’t think its liberal members can speak for themselves.

And rather than present themselves as reasonable, they automatically dismiss any name from a “short list” the president might have of potential high court candidates.
Interestingly, Seattle Indivisible relies on an opinion piece in the New York Times to support its position. That essay said, among other things:

“His replacement by a conservative justice — something Mr. Trump has vowed to his supporters — could imperil a variety of landmark Supreme Court precedents on social issues where Justice Kennedy frequently sided with his liberal colleagues, particularly on abortion.”

The upcoming confirmation battle, regardless who is nominated to succeed Kennedy, will be far more intense than that over Neil Gorsuch, who was confirmed last year. It may reveal to voters, in plenty of time to influence the mid-term elections, just who is an extremist, obstructionist, absolutist and/or downright anarchist.