Liberal university professors are demanding President Joe Biden go against recent Supreme Court rulings they believe are “gravely mistaken” constitutional interpretations.
Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet and San Francisco State University political scientist Aaron Belkin wrote a letter to the president on Wednesday asking him to tell the public that his administration will be “guided by its own constitutional interpretations.” The letter comes after conservative justices have been subject to allegations of failing to disclose financial donations or gifts they have received.
GOP SENATORS WORK TO BLOCK BIDEN’S PLANS — LITERALLY
Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas have largely been the subjects of such reports and have alleged they are victims of a smear campaign targeting conservative justices.
“We have worked diligently over the past five years to advocate Supreme Court expansion as a necessary strategy for restoring democracy,” Tushnet and Belkin wrote via Fox News. “Although we continue to support expansion, the threat that MAGA justices pose is so extreme that reforms that do not require Congressional approval are needed at this time, and advocates and experts should encourage President Biden to take immediate action to limit the damage.”
Conservative judges such as Justice Brett Kavanaugh have pushed back against the notion that the court is driven by a conservative supermajority, saying a lot of decisions were “9-0, but then there might be a lot of 7-2, 6-3s with all sorts of different lineups.”
More than 50% of the cases decided during the 2022-2023 term were unanimous. Only five cases that saw split decisions were divided along ideological lines. Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts joined the three liberal justices in favor of black voters who claimed district maps invoked racial gerrymandering.
Belkin and Tushnet also claimed “MAGA justices” pose a “grave threat” to the Constitution — a notion pushed by Democrats in the wake of several high-profile rulings.
Biden criticized the Supreme Court as “not a normal court” after he saw a blow to several policy areas, including the end to federally protected abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization; the protection of religious expression in 303 Creative v. Elenis; and the elimination of Biden’s broad student loan relief program in Biden v. Nebraska and Department of Education v. Brown.
George Washington University law professor and legal expert Jonathan Turley, who warned about this interpretation of the Constitution in an opinion piece for the Hill on Saturday, wrote that the professors’ proposal went against the “majority of the public,” citing polling on the debt forgiveness and affirmative action rulings.
A poll from Rasmussen Reports showed 65% of likely voters in the country agree with the court’s decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College to end race-based admission policies in universities.
“In other words, they are calling for Biden to declare himself the final arbiter of what the Constitution means and to exercise unilateral executive power without congressional approval,” Turley wrote. “He is to become a government unto himself.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The president has already announced his own effort to circumvent the court’s ruling on his broad student loan forgiveness plan by adjusting the income-driven repayment plan that Congress approved in the 1990s. With this, Biden seeks to discharge $39 billion over the coming weeks.
Republicans have argued that this new plan is unconstitutional, while law experts say the plan appears to be on sound footing.
