ABC Cheers Leftist’s Book on Conservatives Justices Being ‘Threat to Democracy’

June 6th, 2023 8:29 AM

Monday on ABC’s Good Morning America, co-host and former Clinton official George Stephanopoulos trotted out far-left author Michael Waldman to tout his new book The Supermajority that doubled as a screed with the thesis that, in Stephanopoulos’s summation, conservative justices are “a threat to democracy” for rulings he believes are counter to a center-left country.

Towards the end of his interview, Stephanopoulos cheered on Waldman’s scorched-earth rhetoric: “And you don’t mince your words in this book. You believe the Supreme Court is a threat to democracy.”

 

 

Stephanopoulos listened intently as Waldman hilariously claimed “the country is moving in one direction over time” (to the left), but “the court is veering sharply in another direction.”

Because the Court won’t bow the woke mob, Waldman explained, “public trust collapses and it can really create a crisis and that’s where I think we are.” Of course, he cited the left’s performance in the 2022 midterms as proof for this.

The former Clinton official then huffed to Waldman that Democrats winning would be “the only way to change the court.”

Waldman then argued the last year was proof “we the people” (again, liberals) “need to understand this matters a lot” as “conservatives have understood this for a long time.”

Again using “they” and “we” to describe the American people when it’s actually the left, he concluded:

They’re sort of falling out of love with the court, and it’s totally right for us to be debating the actions of the court to be debating whether they should have these lifetime appointments and this much power and what that means for our democracy, absolutely.

Rewinding to the beginning, Stephanopoulos cued him up: “His new book The Supermajority is a deep dive into the Supreme Court and the sweeping decisions that are shaking the country. It comes out tomorrow...So, you write that the Supreme Court crammed decades of social change into three days last June. Explain.”

Waldman eagerly replied with bitterness about how, in just three days, “unelected, lifetime appointed judges...overturned Roe v. Wade, undoing abortion rights,” “issued the most sweeping Second Amendment ruling ever, saying basically that you cannot consider public safety, and...made it much harder for government agencies to protect the environment”.

“They crammed decades of social change into those three days affecting millions of lives and more to come,” he added.

Talk about someone in need of some serious cope.

Like always, liberals are free to actually undermine democracy, question the integrity of the Constitution, and melt down when they don’t get their way.

Stephanopoulos, of course, played Waldman up as spouting the absolute truth. On the Dobbs leak, Waldman refused to denounce the leaker, instead chalking it up to “politics engulfing the court”.

Like a good liberal, Stephanopoulos went to the left’s made-up scandal to smear and take down Justice Clarence Thomas while Waldman argued he’s why justices need term limits (click “expand”)

STEPHANOPOULOS: One of the things that’s adding to that right now is Clarence Thomas who’s facing these questions about ethics because he received some payments and some gifts from a big Republican donor. Is there any way to police this? Famously, Supreme Court justices don’t live under the same ethics, guidelines that other judges do.

WALDMAN: I think that nobody is so wise that they should be the judge in their own case. So the Supreme Court needs a binding ethics code just the same way all the other courts have that. Congress could do it or the court could do it itself. I think also that there ought to be 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices. You know, George Washington had the insight that nobody should have too much public power for too long when he stepped down. That’s a broad idea. That’s very popular on left and right in this country.

After Waldman insisted it could be done in Congress, the two lamented that Chief Justice John Roberts doesn’t have more of an impact on the court when, in reality, it’s, in Waldman’s words Thomas who “holds the power” with “[h]is idea” of “originalism.”

ABC cheering on this actual attempt to delegitimize a democratic institution because the far-left isn’t getting what they want is made possible thanks to the endorsement of advertisers such as Audi and Comcast. Follow the links to see their contact information at the MRC’s Conservatives Fight Back page.

To see the relevant ABC transcript from June 5, click “expand.”

ABC’s Good Morning America
June 5, 2023
8:39 a.m. Eastern [TEASE]

LARA SPENCER: Coming up on Good Morning America — I should take these off for this — inside the Supreme Court decisions that have changed American lives.

(....)

8:42 a.m. Eastern

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Live on GMA; Michael Waldman Talks “The Supermajority”; Inside the Supreme Court’s Recent Monumental Decisions]

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: We are back with Michael Waldman. His new book The Supermajority is a deep dive into the Supreme Court and the sweeping decisions that are shaking the country. It comes out tomorrow. Michael, welcome.

MICHAEL WALDMAN: Great to be with you.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So, you write that the Supreme Court crammed decades of social change into three days last June. Explain.

WALDMAN: Last June, the unelected, lifetime appointed judges, justices of the Supreme Court, of course, they overturned Roe v. Wade, undoing abortion rights that women had trusted in the Constitution for half a century. They issued the most sweeping Second Amendment ruling ever, saying basically that you cannot consider public safety. And they made it much harder for government agencies to protect the environment and do other things like that. They crammed decades of social change into those three days affecting millions of lives and more to come.

STEPHANOPOULOS: More to come. We’re going to have more decisions coming later this month. Of course, that Roe v. Wade decision was preceded by an unbelievable leak, prestaging the decision. What’s the significance of that?

WALDMAN: Well, they rely on silence, on being treated as a court, on trust. And it helped collapse public trust in the Court that their opinion leaked. There had been other leaks in the country’s history before, even the Dread Scott ruling, it turned out, way back when. But it’s part of kind of the politics engulfing the court where they’re attacking each other and where the public is not seeing them as above politics, but very much part of it.

STEPHANOPOULOS: One of the things that’s adding to that right now is Clarence Thomas who’s facing these questions about ethics because he received some payments and some gifts from a big Republican donor. Is there any way to police this? Famously, Supreme Court justices don’t live under the same ethics, guidelines that other judges do.

WALDMAN: I think that nobody is so wise that they should be the judge in their own case. So the Supreme Court needs a binding ethics code just the same way all the other courts have that. Congress could do it or the court could do it itself. I think also that there ought to be 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices. You know, George Washington had the insight that nobody should have too much public power for too long when he stepped down. That’s a broad idea. That’s very popular on left and right in this country.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Popular on the left and right, but any real chance that it’s going to happen any time soon?

WALDMAN: It could be done by a constitutional amendment. I think it could be done by statute by Congress, too, but the more people see this court as out of touch as radical in some instances, as upending their lives or upending politics, the more pressure there’s going to be for some action about the court or reform of the court itself.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, the chief justice is John Roberts, but it’s not really his court anymore, is it?

WALDMAN: John Roberts’s name, we give that name sort of as a convenience. He’s only one vote. He holds the gavel. But in a lot of ways, Clarence Thomas holds the power. His idea that originalism, that the only way you can interpret the Constitution is to ask, in effect, what it meant in 1791. That’s now dominant and that is what is affecting so many of these rulings at least it’s the argument that’s being made one after another as these rulings are issued to the public.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And you don’t mince your words in this book. You believe the Supreme Court is a threat to democracy.

WALDMAN: I think the country is moving in one direction over time and the court is veering sharply in another direction. When you have that kind of gap, public trust collapses. And it can really create a crisis and that’s where I think we are. We saw the response in the midterm elections where responding to the Dobbs case on abortion rights, Democrats had the best midterm election in decades and it looks like it’s going to have a similar consequence in other races in 2024 and beyond.

STEPHANOPOULOS: And that’s really the only way to change the court, right?

WALDMAN: I — I think that more than anything else, we the people need to understand this matters a lot. I think conservatives have understood this for a long time. I think liberals now are waking up. They’re sort of falling out of love with the court, and it’s totally right for us to be debating the actions of the court to be debating whether they should have these lifetime appointments and this much power and what that means for our democracy, absolutely.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Michael Waldman, thanks for coming in. The Supermajority is available tomorrow.