Good for me but not for thee

May 6, 2021
May 6, 2021 Updated Apr 13, 2025
10

Editor,

As a current visitor in El Salvador, I was struck by yet another example of Democrat Party leadership hypocrisy, all the way down here.

(10) comments

Tafhdyd May 6, 2021 1:46pm

Mr. van Ulden,

You mention being a visitor in El Salvador and speaking of DEMOCRATIC Party hypocrisy. I have to guess that you were visiting for the past five years. Obviously you have missed the Republican hypocrisy of the past five years here in America.

Could you explain how the Democrats have stacked the court when there are six conservative and three liberal Justices on the court at this time? The hypocritical Republicans denied a hearing for Mr. Garland with almost a year to go in Obama’s term and rammed Ms. Barrett through just minutes before the election. Without a doubt the Republican Party is the standard-bearer for hypocrisy.

BTW, if you can turn your right wing eyes left long enough to read a short article in Esquire, here is another example dealing with the confirmation of Ms. Barrett.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a34713194/marco-rubio-raphael-warnock-faith-amy-coney-barrett/

Ray Fowler May 6, 2021 3:41pm

Hi, Tafhdyd

There is a lot here and I am out the door, but I wanted to touch lightly on a few items...

It looks like Dirk may have been taken out of context... I think his reference to Dems stacking SCOTUS is a reference to a bill just introduced that could balloon the Supreme Court to 15 justices... and is not meant to say the Court has already been packed. As a reminder... a president... D or R... filling a vacancy is not stacking the Court.

Do you remember who first used the nuclear option with respect to filling federal court vacancies? Sen. Reid... a Democrat. Oddly enough, years before Reid did so, Sen. Bill Frist... a Republican... was faced with the possibility of going nuclear. He did not do so. OK for Reid but not McConnell?

Here's the real Dem hypocrisy... both Barack and Joe argued in favor of the filibuster. But now that it's in the way of Dem progressives, Joe likens the filibuster to Jim Crow. Skrrrrip! What the what?! That same filibuster Dems used to torpedo a police reform bill last year. Just today, Rep. Omar was calling for Dems in the Senate to do away with the filibuster. If the filibuster is set aside, Dems will ram through federalized voting laws, packing the Supreme Court, and creating a 51st state.

I'll have to get to your article later. But what in Justice Barrett's past service on the bench suggests she would not support the legal principle of stare decisis with respect to Roe v Wade?

Rel May 6, 2021 5:30pm

Ray, the House introduced a bill to increase the number of SCOTUS members to be in line with the number of District Courts, 13, which was the method used in prior history to determine membership. The real question is whether it is any more ethical to change the rules to gain a conservative majority, or to "stack" the court through the legislative process? Dirk seems to indicate it is OK to gain the advantage through McConnell's change of standards, but it is not OK to have the court truly represent the voter majority by stacking. FYI: the inconvenient truth is Biden is on the record against stacking the court and has stated his opposition to ending the filibuster. It is his advisors and House members who are in the opposition to his viewpoint.

Ray Fowler May 6, 2021 9:23pm

Rel

Thanks for a cogent and well reasoned response to my comments.

This is an area where I do not have much expertise. Yes, the number of circuit courts grew. from three in 1789 to its present number of thirteen, but the growth of the circuit court system was designed as a way to take pressure off SCOTUS, i.e. lessen the Supreme Court's case load. That means you don;t have to increase the number of justices as adding more Supreme Court justices would not make the court more efficient. As you know, there have been nine justices on the Supreme Court since 1869... There is no need to increase the number of justices as only five states have been added to the circuit court system during the last 125 years.

As you also may recall, late in the 2020 campaign, when candidate Biden was asked about increasing the size of the court he declined to answer... then famously added that the people did not deserve to know his stance on court packing. Let that sink in... the DNC nominee said the people don't deserve to know his position on expanding SCOTUS. OK.

Tafhdyd May 6, 2021 6:23pm

Ray,

I understand that Dirk was no doubt talking about what could be, not what is, but in typical right wing fashion he stated it as if it is. SOP for the right to throw it at the wall and hope the gullible believe it.

The article is not regarding Justice Barrrett's qualifications or ruling on precedents, but on Rubio's hypocrisy.

Ray Fowler May 6, 2021 9:34pm

Thanks for the clarification. I mistakenly thought the article would be focused on how Sen. Warnock's faith informs him as a legislator and how Justice Barrett's faith might inform her decisions. That would be a lively debate.

I think Sen. Warnock is more likely to allow his personal beliefs to inform his performance, but to be fair... his job is a lot different than Justice Barrett's job. If voters don't like what Sen. Warnock is doing, they can vote him out. The electorate cannot vote a justice off the bench. However, Supreme Court justices can be impeached and removed from the Court.

edkahl May 6, 2021 10:23am

The left seeks the unequal application of the law - one standard for the left and a different standard for right. Nothing could be more corrosive to our society than the use of double standards.

Rel May 6, 2021 5:15pm

No Ed, nothing can be more corrosive to our society than the use of NO standards which is the definition of the Republican Party today.

Ray Fowler May 6, 2021 9:42pm

It's a cliche but... if it wasn't for double standards, the Democrats would have no standards at all. Now, while it's not fair to paint all Dems or all Dem policies with the same broad brush... the cliche does have some applicability. Here's one example lifted off this week's pages... the party that claims it exalts equality and ostensibly condemns racism refers to a US senator with racial epithets. Is that not an example of a double standard?

Terence Y May 6, 2021 9:13am

Thanks for the insight, Mr. van Ulden. I would be more surprised if there was no hypocrisy since for Democrats, hypocrisy is in their nature. While you’re in El Salvador, maybe you can spread the word that President Bukele should write a column condemning stacking the court.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!