Justice Kagan cautions Supreme Court can forfeit legitimacy

AP ^ | Sept 12, 2022 | MARK SHERMAN

[where's_the_Outrage?]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan on Monday cautioned that courts look political and forfeit legitimacy when they needlessly overturn precedent and decide more than they have to.

Speaking less than three months after a five-justice conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade's constitutional guarantee of abortion access, Kagan said the public's view of the court can be damaged especially when changes in its membership lead to big changes in the law.

She stressed that she was not talking about any particular decision or even a string of rulings with which she disagreed.

Still, her remarks were similar to points made in dissenting opinions she wrote or contributed to in recent months, including in the abortion case.

“Judges create legitimacy problems for themselves ... when they instead stray into places where it looks like they’re an extension of the political process or when they’re imposing their own personal preferences,” Kagan said at Temple Emanu-El in New York. The event was livestreamed.

[where's_the_Outrage?]

Notice how she neglects to mention the Constitution. That needs to be the overriding precedent, not established law (AKA case law) where bad precedent snowballs into more anti-Constitutional BS (e.g., US GVT redefining marriage, blurring the lines between male and female, etc.)

[Steely Tom]

Justice Kagan cautions Supreme Court can forfeit legitimacy

Supreme Court Justices can surely forfeit their individual legitimacy.

[rfp1234]

SCOTUS forfeited its legitimacy in 1973.

And again in 2012, when John Roberts moronically called Obozocare a tax.

[GMMC0987]

Let’s not forget Kelo.

[ManardG]

I wonder if she was against the overturning of Brown and Plessy?

[Governor Dinwiddie]

Afraid to look political? Oh, yeah. Ask Roosevelt. Ask all who suffered Earl Warren, the most despicable justice of the 20th Century. Ask Judge Bork and the hell they put him through. Ask Justice Thomas. It has been hyper-lefist political all of my life. So I say to Kagan STFU. For every ruling that goes conservative, there have been nine that went ultra-liberal.

[lee martell]

Kagan rarely has any public comments. She finally speaks up, but almost in the form of a Haiku.
Does all this ‘concern’ boil down to the abortion decision?

[Republican Wildcat]

No, Justice Kagan, justices lose legitimacy when they rule based on personal policy preferences rather than based on the law and the Constitution - casting aside the whole point of a judiciary. In Dobbs, the justices made no ruling on any personal policy preference but recognized the reality that the Constitution does not permit the Court to regulate abortion policy and adhered to that reality.

[Quentin Quarantino]

The Court looks political when Leftist activist judges say political things like this.

[Seruzawa]

Funny that big sweeping changes in the law by liberals is just fine.

[AnthonySoprano]

Dems Voting together as a Bloc regardless, does that risk legitimacy?

Wonder why she’s not demanding the Leaker be found?

[Nifster]

Do what I want or else

How childish

[MileHi]

“Judges create legitimacy problems for themselves ... when they instead stray into places where it looks like they’re an extension of the political process or when they’re imposing their own personal preferences,”

True. So in the interest of the Court, when will you be stepping down?

[cranked]

As they continue to use a super-sized spoon to stir up a civil war. Bet.

[jerod]

She’s essentially ‘justified’ those who apposed her appointment... She’s a blatant left leaning political sycophant who’s judgments are based solely on her politics, rather than the rule of law and the constitution. And she taints herself and the court she sits on with her ‘opinion’.

[Boomer]

Yeah, Kagan is an activist first and somewhere down the line she’s a judge but not a very good one.

[Redmen4ever]

Justice Kagan is an insurrectionist.

[DoughtyOne]

They did that when they brought her in.

[Bullish]

where the f*** is it written in the constitution that anyone has the constitutional right to murder another human being? which is what abortion always boils down to. They can’t separate that from the deed no matter how hard they try.

[laweeks]

needlessly overturn precedent

should read "responsibly overturn precedent"