Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito,
he delivered a speech,
that's on Thursday at
the University of Notre Dame.
And he took that opportunity to
respond to an article written in
the Atlantic by Adam Serwer.
Apologies if I
mispronounce his name.
He respond to the article that was
written by Adam Serwer about
the Supreme Court's actions, or,
lack thereof,
when it came to the anti-choice
law that was passed in Texas.
So, first, let's go to a couple of
the points in the article that
Alito took some offense to.
First of all, the conservative
majority in the Supreme Court was
so eager to nullify Roe v Wade,
the 1973 precedent
securing the right to abortion,
that it didn't even wait for oral
arguments, is what Serwer said.
He went on to say, instead,
in the middle of the night,
five of the High Court's
conservatives issued a brief
unsigned order allowing a Texas law
that bans abortion at six weeks.
So that was part of the article's
longer than, of course, but
these things is what Alito pointed
out here in this video of him
speaking in Notre Dame.
>> Here is a line from a recent
piece, talking about our refusal
to grant an injunction in
the Texas abortion case, quote,
the Conservative majority on
the Supreme Court was so
eager to nullify Roe v Wade,
that it didn't even wait for
oral argument, ends quote.
Now, put aside the false and
inflammatory claim that we notified
Roe vs Wade.
We did no such thing.
And we said that, expressly,
in our order.
I quote, the applicants now before
us have raised serious questions
regarding the constitutionality of
the Texas law, at issue.
This order is not based on any
conclusion about the
constitutionality of Texas's law.
So the statement is flatly wrong
and suggestion that we should have
held oral argument is ridiculous.
>> So, after that,
Adam Serwer took to Twitter to
dispute some of these things.
They went back and forth for
one tweet here that he did say was,
while AS Roma is playing, truly
a shameful talisman of the court's
politicization, is what he said in
response to this video where he was
speaking out against it.
Now, the thing that stuck out to me
is this, I don't want to you guys
can maybe discuss the back and
forth whether or
not who's right and wrong on this.
But I just noticed
how Supreme Court Justice tend to
be responding more and more to
people's criticisms of the way that
they handle this and maybe many
other things, as they now have this
big conservative majority.
because I also remembered earlier
in September, let's jump down to
Amy Coney Barrett in quote
number five here, you guys.
She said, and she was speaking also
as well at an event in Kentucky.
And she said,
in the wake of a controversial
decision on abortion rights,
the US Supreme Court Justice Amy,
I'm sorry,
this is from the article.
Amy Coney Barrett told a crowd more
than 100 people that she doesn't
believe the highest court in
the land is politically driven.
She said, quote,
my goal today is to convince you
that this court is not comprised
of a bunch of partisan hacks.
She went on to say,
the media along with hot takes
on Twitter report the results and
decisions that makes the decision
seen results-oriented.
It leaves the reader to judge
whether the court is right or
wrong, based on whether she liked
the results of the decision,
is what Barrett also said.
And then she continued by saying,
I don't always like the results of
my decisions.
It's not my job to decide cases
based on the outcome that I want.
So, I'm seeing this,
a lot of these folks and
these justices are trying to
defend their actions in public now.
And I feel like maybe because I
wasn't paying attention as
closely before,
they didn't do this as much.
And I've made this comparison with
athletes, the Michael Jordans and
the Scottie Pippens, and
run our tests of the world.
Maybe they would have had
a different kind of reaction to
the way people responded to what he
did because social media wasn't.
The athletes now have to look at
everyone's saying something about
them and maybe the Supreme Court
Justices are feeling the same kind
of pressure and now they feel
the need to respond because they
feel like their character is not
being lambasted in the press and
then on Twitter.
Amy Coney Barrett mentioned it,
specifically, they're
tweeting about me.
>> Yeah.
>> It seems a little weird.
>> Yeah, you're right, Jayar.
I don't remember other Justices
doing this nearly as much.
Alito, I'm sorry, Scalia used to do
it from time to time.
But it almost feels like they're
responding to the trolls.
But except, in this case,
the trolls are no trolls they're
legitimate reporters bringing up
very good points
about the politicization of
the Supreme Court.
Amy Coney Barrett, her point,
in my opinion, is a joke.
Yes, I can show you cases where
they don't rule party line.
But I can show you a hell of a lot
more cases where they do.
Coincidentally, well,
look at that they're good,
Liberals went this way and
the Conservatives went that way,
and look at that it seems to match
up with their political opinions.
That happens the overwhelming
majority of the time.
But, by the way, the one thing
where they often join up,
although the Liberal Justices have
been pretty good about it,
recently, is corporate rulings.
So, and she might say, hey,
look on that issue we didn't
vote in the conservative way.
But on an overwhelming majority of
those cases where the Conservatives
don't vote right-wing,
they're voting pro-corporate, okay?
Now having said all that I'm
going to throw a curveball here,
and say I don't think Alito
was wrong.
But we have an actual legal expert,
Adrienne.
And by the way,
you should check out our videos on
Rebel headquarters, where she does
legal analysis for us, as well.
But I'm curious,
Adrienne, Alito says,
look, we didn't rule on the merits,
I think that's true.
We didn't rule on
the constitutionality.
I think that's true.
In effect, they put Roe v Wade
in jeopardy in Texas.
So that's why I'm
a little torn on it.
What do you think?
>> Well, I think Alito knows that
his comment was absolute nonsense.
Because the fact is that no,
technically you did not overrule
Roe v Wade, but
effectively you kind of did.
And I think that he is
very much well aware of that.
And the signal that has been sent
now from the ruling as
it concerns this Texas law, and how
it's signaling to other states to
go ahead and to create their own.
And Alito knows that, and so this
is part of the problem that people
are criticizing the Court for.
Because it's, essentially, just
saying, well, we kind of did this
thing, but oops, I guess it really
jeopardizes and really kind of
effectively overrules Roe v Wade.
And it's like he's playing stupid.
But then on top of that,
listening to Amy Coney Barrett and
the rest of these individuals on
the court, now,
essentially taking it to the public
arena to defend their positions.
It seems really kind of almost
petty and small when you're
supposed to be at this elite level
on the mound ruling at the highest
court in the nation.
I have never seen anything
really like this.
Scalia would throw out quips,
occasionally, because that was
his thing.
But for them to, essentially,
really come down from the mound,
just so that they can defend
themselves, that really says that
they're in a position where their
cases have been undermined and
their legitimacy is undermined and
there is good reason for
it >> Does it make them look bad,
you think, to do that?
>> Yeah, it makes them look silly,
small, petty, and on our level,
whereas they're supposed to be at
this heightened level where
we all want to become them in
this thought that they are these
philosophers and these minds that
we can never attain.
Nah, they're just like the people
at the pub.
>> Totally, and I think Amy Coney
Barrett's more wrong than Alito is.
This whole idea of no,
we don't have political opinions,
we have judicial philosophy,
my ass you do.
All the conservative justices
are ruling state's right to
discriminate against black people,
make sure they can't vote,
state's right, right?
And then like, okay,
how about a state's rights to
legalize marijuana?
They're like screw states rights.
We don't give a damn about
states' rights.
And besides which we're not even
having this conversation after Bush
v Gore, where the five Republican
justices just put Bush into office
and said, literally stop the count.
We don't want democracy we want
the Republican guy to be president.
So, they politicized this
a long time ago.
All right, we're out of time.
In the bonus episode, are we really
going to fight with Joe Rogan,
Mike Lindell's guts, and how many
Republicans want us to see.
You're going to love it
TYT.com/join, we'll see you there.