In a letter on Wednesday, university professors urged President Biden to find ways to defy the rulings of "MAGA justices" for their "gravely mistaken" constitutional interpretations. Mark Tushnet, a Harvard law professor and Aaron Belkin, a San Francisco State University political scientist penned what they called "An Open Letter to the Biden Administration on Popular Constitutionalism". This was in their effort to respond to what Biden has called "not a normal court" following recent high-profile cases.
The academics wrote-
"We urge President Biden to restrain MAGA justices immediately by announcing that if and when they issue rulings that are based on gravely mistaken interpretations of the Constitution that undermine our most fundamental commitments, the Administration will be guided by its own constitutional interpretations,"…
"We have worked diligently over the past five years to advocate Supreme Court expansion as a necessary strategy for restoring democracy. Although we continue to support expansion, the threat that MAGA justices pose is so extreme that reforms that do not require Congressional approval are needed at this time, and advocates and experts should encourage President Biden to take immediate action to limit the damage."-Mark Tushnet, Harvard Law Professor and Aaron Belkin, San Francisco State University Political Scientist
Citing a solution known as "popular constitutionalism", Tushnet and Belkin said-
"that courts do not exercise exclusive authority over constitutional meaning." [theorizing that the Supreme Court’s decisions are] "egregiously wrong" [offering an alternative constitutional interpretation for rulings that ] pose a "grave threat."…
"In this particular historical moment, MAGA justices pose a grave threat to our most fundamental commitments because they rule consistently to undermine democracy and to curtail fundamental rights, and because many of their rulings are based on misleading and untrue claims,"-Mark Tushnet, Harvard Law Professor and Aaron Belkin, San Francisco State University Political Scientist
However, on Saturday, in a warning, George Washington University law professor and legal expert Jonathan Turley penned an op-ed for The Hill, that cautioned regarding this interpretation of the Constitution. Turley wrote-
"What is most striking about these professors is how they continue to claim they are defenders of democracy, yet seek to use unilateral executive authority to defy the courts and, in cases like the tuition forgiveness and affirmative action, the majority of the public. They remain the privileged elite of academia, declaring their values as transcending both constitutional and democratic processes," adding…
"In other words, they are calling for Biden to declare himself the final arbiter of what the Constitution means and to exercise unilateral executive power without congressional approval. He is to become a government unto himself."-Jonathan Turley
In an effort to counter "Republican obstruction, theft and procedural abuse" in the Supreme Court, following the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh, in 2018, Tushnet and Belkin took part in the "1.20.21 Project,". Reportedly, the project predominantly focused on expanding the size of all the nation’s federal courts and packing them with liberal judges.
Pushing the Biden Administration to ignore Supreme Court decisions based on its lack of legitimacy in 2022, former Niskanen Center Vice President for Research Will Wilkinson tweeted-
"The court famously has no enforcement authority. Its authority is based in acceptance of the court’s legitimacy. But it can’t do whatever the hell it wants however it wants and expect deference. [E]xecutive ought to brush off the court’s junta-like attempts to rule by edict,"Will Wilkinson, Former Niskanen Center, Vice President for Research
Seemingly the left only wants to subscribe to the judgements of the Supreme Court, if they align with their own wishes. The left desires to expand and stack the court to do just that.
Encouraging Biden to ignore the high courts’ rulings, sets the stage for constitutional anarchy. it literally sets his unchecked oversight by Congress and the High Court as above them both, establishing his own executive powers as primary. This situation is much like being a dictator in his own right – not a part of the system of checks and balances provided by the founders of this nation.
According The Hill-
“The Framers saw the Supreme Court as playing a counter-majoritarian role when it is necessary to protect individual rights and constitutional norms. The alternative is what the Framers viewed as a tyranny of the majority, where popularity rather than principle prevails. For that reason, the Court has often stood with the least popular in our society and, since Marbury v. Madison, has had the final word on what the Constitution means.”-The Hill
“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts...We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”-Abraham Lincoln