Select Page

Schumer Threatens Kavanaugh and Gorsuch

Schumer Threatens Kavanaugh and Gorsuch

Schumer Threatens

In an act never rarely ever seen, one that is dangerous due to possible escalation, Senator Schumer, while addressing a pro-abortion gathering during the Supreme Court’s hearing over a Louisiana Abortion law, threatened Supreme Court Justices. This, in turn, drew an even more rare rebuke from Chief Justice Roberts against Schumer.

We are now seeing the threats by Democrats towards Justices if they will not rule the way they demand in a court hearing, this sets a very dangerous escalation of hostilities between the parties, not to mention it is a infringement on the right of the courts under the law to rule in a way that is independent of pressure from the Legislative body.

This all started when address a crowd of protestors outside the Supreme Court, I think they actually feel that they, not the law will sway the justices on how to vote, Schumer while addressing the crowd said:

“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 abortion-rights advocates. “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

“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 abortion-rights advocates. “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

This elicited a rare but quick rebuke from Chief Justice Roberts:

“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.

Schumer not willing to let this stand responded:

Schumer’s office quickly replied with his own written statement, saying that his comments “were a reference to the political price Senate Republicans will pay for putting these justices on the court, and warning that the justices will unleash a major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights….”

Schumer went on to criticize the chief justice for “remaining silent when President Trump attacked Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg” late last month. That failure to stand up for two of the court’s liberals, Schumer said, shows that Roberts “does not just call balls and strikes,” as he promised he would do at his confirmation hearing in 2005.

While there was criticism of both Sotomayor and Ginsburg, no one ever called them out by name and said they were going to go after them, what you have here is a back-step from Schumer realizing he had taken this to dangerous grounds, rather than apologize and say he misspoke he resorted the childish playground tactic of pointing his finger and saying, “What about them?”

Also, I recall he said nothing when Obama during his state of the union speech pointed out the Supreme Court Justices and called them out, so why yelling about this now; it is not like Trump is the first to criticize the court.

The problem comes in when you threaten another co-equal branch of government; you are opening a whole can of worms that may be difficult to contain. We have seen the radicals within the Left’s camp, what’s to prevent them from acting on what Schumer said, to go after the justices?

Further, can you imagine if McConnell said to Ginsberg or any other liberal justice that if they voted a certain way, the GOP was going to go after them? We know the Democrats would have been screaming to censor and then remove from office, yet there is hardly a peep from the Democrats over this threat.

The Democrats looked to the Supreme Court for years to enact laws they could not push through by legislation. Now that they no longer have control with a majority in the Supreme Court, they are now openly turning hostile towards the court. This is the first time in over 50 years there has been a conservative majority on the bench, something that has sent the Left into a meltdown.

According to NPR:

Facts of the Case

Wednesday’s blast from the chief justice came after fierce arguments before the court in a case that tests whether the court should renounce an abortion ruling that is just four years old.

Back in 2016, the high court struck down a Texas law that required doctors at abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. At issue now is a nearly identical law coming out of Louisiana. But in the four years since the Texas case, the composition of the court has changed with the additions of two Trump appointees, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.

With the change in the court’s composition, anti-abortion groups have been pressing hard to get the court to backtrack on abortion rights, with an eye to the ultimate aim of overturning Roe v. Wade.

In the Louisiana case before the court Wednesday, the state defended an admitting privileges statute nearly identical to the Texas law that the court struck down in 2016. Supporters of the law argue that Louisiana passed it to protect patient safety.

“There is a long record in Louisiana as there are in other states of really gross violations of health and safety standards in the abortion industry, we have more than 20 years of documentation,” said Louisiana Congressman Mike Johnson on the steps of the court following oral arguments Wednesday.

But Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, countered that if Louisiana’s law is upheld, clinics across the state will shutter — leaving only one clinic and one doctor to serve the needs of 10,000 women seeking abortions each year in the state.

“It is not right that we have to be here re-fighting a legal battle that we have already won. But unfortunately we are here because the state of Louisiana is in open defiance of the Constitution and of the Supreme Court’s ruling,” Northup said.


It turns out what Northup does not realize is the Supreme Court’s stances change over time, if you look at the cases over the years, as the court evolves, or devolves, you will find many times the high court has overturned earlier rulings.

This has been used over the years to undo earlier standings on slavery, Jim Crow Laws, equal protection under the law, protection from illegal searches and seizures.

The fact that Roe v. Wade is coming up, not the ruling itself, but some of the expansion we have seen over the years, it is hardly surprising, what has changed is the complexity of the court.

One has to ponder, if Trump wins his reelection bid, how many more justices will he replace?

If the Senate holds as it is now, or sees a pick up of GOP seats there would be little the Democrats could do to halt his picks for the Supreme Court, we could be looking at a super-majority of conservative, constitutional justices, something that is a threat for all the Progressives are trying to put in place.

We can expect in such a scenario that Schumer and the Democrats will turn more vocal and hostile if the court no longer works as their enforcement partner to push forward laws they can’t get the people or their representatives to vote for.

At this point, we at 0censor feel justified in demanding Senator Schumer be brought before a disciplinary hearing. Such threats should not be allowed to stand, otherwise what direction will the DNC be headed for next?

About The Author

Timothy Benton

Student of history, a journalist for the last 2 years. Specialize in Middle East History, more specifically modern history with the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Also, a political commentator has been a lifetime fan of politics.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.