Chuck Schumer’s threat to justices just new low in Democrats’ SCOTUS bullying like andrew cuomo gang attacking woman with food truck
Wandering Dago, Inc. v. Destito, No. 16-622 (2d Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary
WD filed suit against OGS, alleging that defendants violated its rights under the First Amendment, the Equal Protection Clause, and the New York State Constitution by denying WD's applications to participate as a food truck vendor in the Lunch Program based on its ethnic-slur branding. The Second Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment for defendant, holding that defendants' action violated WD's equal protection rights and its rights under the New York State Constitution. In this case, it was undisputed that defendants denied WD's applications solely because of its ethnic-slur branding. In Matal v. Tam, 137 S. Ct. 1744 (2017), the Supreme Court clarified that this action amounted to viewpoint discrimination and, if not government speech or otherwise protected, was prohibited by the First Amendment. The court rejected defendants' argument that their actions were unobjectionable because they were either part of OGS's government speech or permissible regulation of a government contractor's speech.
Enlarge Image
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. speaks during abortion rights rally outside of the US Supreme Court on Wednesday. AP
Sorry, Charlie: Your excuse for threatening Supreme Court justices doesn’t cut it.
New York’s own Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, tried Thursday to walk back the direct threats he made to Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — but he only dug the hole deeper.
“I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions,” he huffed at a pro-abortion rally Wednesday. His goal: To intimidate the court to nix a Louisiana law requiring abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.
That’s an outrageous threat.
Schumer now claims he misspoke. Despite his crystal-clear words, he says, he wasn’t vowing “violence” against the jurists — but “political consequences” for President Trump and Senate Republicans if the court backed the Louisiana law.
Please. Schumer well knows the difference between justices, whom he called out by name, and the president and senators. Nor did he offer the men an apology.
Then again, none of the Democrats who last year seized on a soon-retracted New York Times account of a new smear against Kavanaugh to demand his impeachment has apologized yet, either.
The ugly fact is that Schumer’s threat — condemned even by super-liberal Harvard Law prof Laurence Tribe — is of a piece with how Democrats have been crossing the line to intimidate or influence the Supremes for decades now.
It’s worst at confirmation hearings, where the left now routinely engages in rank character assassination. But top Democrats also now warn that the “wrong” decision would delegitimize the high court itself. And President Barack Obama even once used the State of the Union address to baldly misrepresent a ruling.
And, no: President Trump’s call for Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor to recuse themselves in cases involving him, though also perhaps uncalled for, doesn’t come close to these outrages.
Schumer needs to quit the damage control and offer a true apology.
No comments:
Post a Comment