Your July 3 editorial, demanding “Reform Supreme Court before it’s too late” is breathtaking for its audacity. To accuse the current conservative majority of judicial activism, implying this to be a new experience, is simply laughable, given what previous liberal courts have delivered, including Roe v. Wade and its follow-up rulings. Specific to Roe, the Court has not removed the debate from the democratic process, but instead has returned it.

Your accusation that the conservative side of the court has been “… trained, recruited, and privately vetted by unnamed wealthy donors, through dark money groups” is unfounded and an insult to our very democracy. Where did liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elaine Kagan come from? And the most recent addition to the court, Justice Katanji Brown Jackson? Activism? Recall that Justice Sotomayor, during her confirmation hearings, had to walk back a comment from earlier in her career that as a judge with her Hispanic background she might reach better conclusions than a white male that had not lived her life. Is this interpretation of the law? More accurately, it expressed her desire to make law.

You support adding four justices to the court. When will that end? Why would another administration with the support of its party’s majority in Congress not add another four? The real argument against reforming the court’s structure is that once changes have been made, it becomes easier to continue to make changes, ultimately leading to a court that will truly and actually become political in nature. Franklin Roosevelt’s own party recognized this in turning aside his own attempts to pack the Court in 1937.

Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.