AOC just revealed her dangerous constitutional illiteracy
Like every new member of Congress, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez pledged to uphold the Constitution when she was sworn into office. But the socialist congresswoman’s latest criticism of the Supreme Court reveals that she lacks even the most basic understanding of the document she promised to protect.
Not surprised.
…the congresswoman not only endorsed the plan to turn the Supreme Court into a rubber stamp (by packing the SCOTUS) but essentially suggested that she doesn’t believe the high court should act as a check on Congress at all.
WTF! Is she serious?
“How much does the current structure benefit us?” she asked. “I don’t think it does.”
It benefits THE PEOPLE!
With these remarks, the congresswoman misunderstands or rejects the very role the Supreme Court plays in safeguarding our constitutional liberties. She decries the fact that the judiciary can overrule elected policymakers, but that’s exactly the point. The reason we have a First Amendment, for example, is because our right to freedom of speech is supposed to be off-limits — yes, even for “laws that hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocates, and policymakers drew consensus on.”
You cannot make a law that violates the constitution and our rights.
In fact, the Supreme Court’s history is littered with examples in which laws enacted by democratic majorities were struck down by judges in robes to protect our freedoms. Here are just a few:
In the 1954 case Brown v. Board of Education, the court ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, even if enacted through the democratic process.
Most of us don’t think on this, as the thought of segregation in the schools is wrong, yet at one time the majority thought it was OK.
Just like hoe the DEMS think, that since “THEY” have a slight majority, they can do things against the constitution and rights.
What other examples do you have?
In the 1989 case Texas v. Johnson, the court ruled that even if a majority of voters want to ban flag-burning, doing so is an unconstitutional restriction on the freedom of speech.
Burning of the national flag is ok. But IMO needs to be looked at again as burning certain flags (blm, alphabet-community) is a HATE CRIME? ! ? I would then think burning the national flag is ALSO a HATE CRIME. But that is just me.
Studying all the cases in which the Supreme Court has served this important anti-democratic role to protect our freedom would take years. Ocasio-Cortez’s comments suggest that she thinks majoritarian support alone should be the criteria for a public policy’s legality. The congresswoman ought to reflect on this given the fact that such horrors as slavery, segregation, and the denial of women’s suffrage all once commanded huge majorities of public support.
Just like the majority gave the Nazis power, the communists power (Soviets/CCP), etc.
So using her logic, slavery was OK as it was the majority who supported it?
Segregation was OK because at the time the majority supported it?
Denial of “woman’s rights” was OK because at that time the majority supported it?
Yet when you hear here speak, that is NOT what she is claiming.
She is claiming, like the majority did back then, that it is ‘ONLY TODAY’S MAJORITY, FEELINGS, VALUES, ETC.” that matter.
Well, tell that to those in the future who look back at our present and cannot understand how STUPID people like AOC and those following her example are.
The very point of our Constitution is to establish between the different branches of our government a system of checks and balances, so they keep each other from overreaching and violating our rights. By striking down laws that go beyond the Constitution’s bounds, the Supreme Court plays a vital role in keeping Congress in check.
Once again, something people like AOC fails to understand.
That Ocasio-Cortez seemingly thinks the Supreme Court should rubber-stamp anything she and her colleagues pass with majoritarian “consensus” reveals a woeful misunderstanding of or utter disdain for the Constitution she’s sworn to protect.
Otherwise, congress become like a dictatorship. Something AOC seems to aspire to become with her “agendas”.
.
