It would be a mistake not to view as two parts of the same notion a) House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s extraordinary comment the other day that the reelection of President Trump would endanger Western civilization and b) Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s outburst last week threatening two Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court with dire consequences if they don’t rule his way in an abortion case. In fact both reflect the growing belief in Democratic circles that there is only one acceptable outcome to any public debate and that it is the one they support.
This anti-democratic notion has fostered a total lack of respect for any decision-making not to their liking – and it is growing. It is hard not to seriously fear that the unraveling of our social fabric – which by definition relies on the electoral process and presumptive deference to legally or constitutionally prescribed authority – is upon us. In our society, we have looked to elections to determine who will be our legitimate decision-makers until the next electoral go around. Is that notion still in play?
Last Monday, speaking at a symposium on women’s rights, Pelosi said, “This [2020] election is a very important election. In my view, civilization as we know it is at stake. It’s about everything. It’s about America…. We ask God to bless America. What is America? America is our Constitution [which is] under siege.”
To those who see this as simply 2020 electioneering, it should be noted that Speaker Pelosi employed the same rhetoric last December prior to the launch of the Trump impeachment proceedings in the House, close to a year before the scheduled elections: “Let’s not even contemplate [Trump’s reelection]…. Civilization as we know it today is at stake in the next election, and certainly our planet.”
Pelosi underscored her utter disdain for anything she doesn’t embrace when she refused to accept Trump’s acquittal by the Senate after the constitutionally prescribed proceedings: “He will be remain impeached forever.” And if there were any lingering doubt, she repeated the comment in explaining why she ceremoniously tore up her copy of the President’s State of the Union Message before the cameras in the House Chamber.
For his part, Schumer, speaking at a rally of pro-choice supporters last Wednesday on the steps of the Supreme Court, threatened Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh that they would “pay the price” if they didn’t vote the right way in the abortion case scheduled to be argued in the Court that day:
Inside the walls of this court, the Supreme Court is hearing arguments, as you know, for the first major abortion rights cases since Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Gorsuch came to the bench. We know what’s at stake. Over the last three years, women’s reproductive rights have come under attack in a way we haven’t seen in modern history. From Louisiana to Missouri to Texas, Republican legislatures are waging a war on women, all women, and they’re taking away fundamental rights. I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.
The bottom line is very simple…. We will tell President Trump and Senate Republicans, who have sacked the court with right-wing ideologues, that you’re going to be gone in November, and you will never be able to do what you’re trying to do now ever, ever, again. You hear that over there on the far right? You’re gone in November.
We are here to send these folks a message, “Not on our watch.” Let me ask you, my friends, are we going to let Republicans undo a woman’s right to choose?
For Schumer, the Justices have no acceptable alternative but to invalidate the emerging restrictions on abortions. This, even though he readily concedes the likelihood that the Justices – and their ideological soul mates – believe in the restrictions as matters of constitutional law. Imagine, according to the U.S. Senate’s leading Democrat, justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are to be prohibited from voting in accordance with their understanding of constitutional law if it conflicts with his views.
Let’s not be sidetracked by debating whether he and Pelosi were merely politicking in anticipation of the November elections. Let’s stay focused on their disturbing notion that their agenda is the revealed word.