Podcast: Play in new window | Download ()
Subscribe: Android | RSS | More
Speaking to a group of pro-abortion protestors outside the U.S. Supreme Court, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) warned Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh that they would face severe consequences should they fail to rule the “correct” way on a challenge to a Louisiana abortion law that the court is currently hearing.
“I want to tell you Gorsuch. I want to tell you Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price,” Schumer told the rabid crowd on Wednesday.
“You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions,” Schumer added.
A Schumer spokesman said that his comments were a “reference to the political price” Republicans will pay for putting the two Trump nominees — Gorsuch and Kavanaugh — on the court.
But it sure sounded like a direct threat to Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
In an extremely rare occurrence, Chief Justice John Roberts scolded the New York senator, calling his comments “dangerous.”
“Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter,” Roberts said on Wednesday.
And as he is wont to do, President Trump took to Twitter to let his feelings be known on Schumer’s threat against the two justices: “This is a direct and dangerous threat to the U.S. Supreme Court by Schumer. If a Republican did this, he or she would be arrested, or impeached. Serious action MUST be taken NOW.”
Some believe that Schumer was not just spouting off and saying something provocative to play to an abortion-friendly audience, but that he purposefully used such charged language because he wanted — perhaps even needed — strong reactions from the president and the GOP in order to make abortion a major campaign issue in 2020.
If true, the tactic sure worked, as numerous GOP congressmen and senators have called Schumer to task for his inflammatory language. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) plans to introduce a motion to censure Schumer in the Senate. And even pro-abortion GOP senator Susan Collins from Maine came to the Court’s defense on Twitter. “I agree with Chief Justice Roberts,” Collins wrote. “These statements by Senator Schumer are outrageous.”
Faced with the increased certainty that their nominee will be either avowed socialist Bernie Sanders or the doddering gaffe machine Joe Biden, the Democrats need to bolster their chances to keep the House of Representatives and retake the Senate. Not to mention somehow taking the presidency from Trump.
But what’s this Louisiana law that’s causing all the ruckous?
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court took up the case of June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, a case challenging a 2014 Louisiana law that requires physicians who perform abortions in the state to have admitting privileges at local hospitals — something many abortionists do not have.
Pro-abortion forces claim the law will effectively close all but one abortion clinic in the state. Roughly 10,000 abortions are performed per year in Louisiana.
Introduced by Democrat State Senator Katrina Jackson, the Unsafe Abortion Protection Act simply makes the abortion procedure subject to the same standard of other outpatient procedures. Jackson considers the bill “a health standard law” and believes that it is “very common sense.”
“Basically, Louisiana, unknowingly to us, had a lower standard of care for women who elected to have abortions in some places,” Jackson said. “And so what we did was make sure that the standard of health care that we established in Louisiana for years also applied to abortion.”
The law sure sounds innocuous enough. The case is not even a direct threat to Roe v. Wade, but a measure meant to ensure the safety of women who undergo medical procedures by “circuit riding” abortionists who pop into town for a night or two to do some abortions and are then on to the next town.
But the health of women (and the health of the unborn, for that matter) is not something that Schumer or his party have very much interest in. The Democrats have always believed that abortion is a winning issue for them, that’s all. And maybe that’s what Schumer wanted all along; something the party could point to in this election year besides their flailing and flawed presidential candidates.
The House of Representatives impeached President Trump on nothing more than a fairy tale whipped up by Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and a yet-to-be-named (officially) whistleblower. The least the GOP could do is censure the minority leader for his reckless and foolhardy threat against the judiciary.
Photo: AP Images
James Murphy is a freelance journalist who writes on a variety of subjects, with a primary focus on the ongoing anthropogenic climate-change hoax and cultural issues. He can be reached at [email protected]
