I have heard New York Sen. Chuck Schumer speak in person. He’s a blowhard, like most politicians. Not exactly a stemwinder. Now he has provoked the latest outrage du jour through intemperate speech. CNBC reports:
Chief Justice John Roberts issued a rare statement on Wednesday defending his newest colleagues, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, after Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer warned at a rally earlier in the day that the two Trump appointees would “pay the price†if they voted against reproductive rights activists.
“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,†Roberts wrote. “All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter.â€
The statement directly named Schumer but did not name Gorsuch or Kavnaugh. The court heard arguments on Wednesday in the first major abortion case since Gorsuch and Kavanaugh joined the bench, one of the most high-profile disputes of the term.
“I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price!†Schumer said at a rally coordinated by the Center for Reproductive Rights around the arguments.
Sen. Schumer’s defenders have retorted that he didn’t actually mean it, he meant something quite different:
Justin Goodman, a Schumer spokesperson, said that the New York lawmaker’s comments referred to the “political price†Republicans will pay for confirming the two justices “and a warning that the justices will unleash major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights against the decision.â€
Justices of the Supreme Court are not elected; they are appointed for life. They cannot “pay a political price”. If Sen. Schumer’s intent was to say that Republicans will pay a political price if Roe v. Wade is struck down by the Supreme Court through decisions of Republican-appointed justices, he should say that was the case, apologize, and move on. If that was not his intent, he should be censured by the Senate and lose his minority leader role.
Threatening judges by name is a bridge too far. That President Trump says intemperate things is no excuse and, indeed, Trump has been chastised by Roberts for his intemperate speech directed toward judges. Our goal should be to lower the temperature not raise it. There are too many crazies with guns out there who will take such statements literally rather than figuratively.
Updated
Politico reports that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is expected to make a statement including the following:
Contrary to what the Democratic leader has tried to claim, he very clearly was not addressing Republican lawmakers or anybody else. He literally directed the statement to the justices, by name. And he said, quote, ‘if you go forward with these awful decisions,’ which could only apply to the court itself. The minority leader of the United States Senate threatened two associate justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. Period.
Sen. Schumer can and should issue a non-apology apology to defuse this situation.
Update 2
The editors of the Wall Street Journal remark:
Mr. Trump recently tweeted that liberal Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor should recuse themselves on cases involving his Administration. He was wrong and the Justices will ignore him too. But Mr. Schumer’s tirade takes bullying the judiciary to a new level, and all those who claim to believe in democratic norms should call him out.
Alternatively, if you believe that “democratic norms” are for suckers, full speed ahead.
Schumer’s statement constitutes and actual felony. It is a direct threat of violence against Kavanaugh and Gorshuch. He must be arrested and prosecuted.
This is yet another example of violence by Democrats against Republican politicians.
Every act of political violence (and there have been hundreds) in the last several Presidential elections has been committed by a Democrat. Every single one. The Democrat Party is a full-blown Fascist party complete with street gangs like the Antifas, today’s Black Shirts. Italy and Germany lost WW II, but the Fascists and Nazis won it.
The excuse is a bald faced lie.
Schumer and Trump, anyone, are perfectly within their rights to criticize judicial decisions. However Schumer is not within his rights to threaten by name the justices, or any judge. Turning down the temperature is a worthy goal in and of itself. However, a threat is something not different in degree, but in kind. Given his position his transgression is all the worse.
In perspective, he should be censured for his appalling remarks. I expect silence or tortured logic approval from the usual suspects.
I agree. I hasten to mention that I think that President Trump was wrong in proposing the Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg recuse themselves from cases involving him but I don’t recall his actually threatening them so there’s a difference in kind there.
Actually, considering Justice Ginsburg’s direct statements about the president there’s an argument she should recuse herself but nonetheless I still think the president was wrong to make the suggestion publicly by name.
I would add that Sen. Schumer’s remarks were worse than a crime they were a mistake. Why pass hand grenades to your political opponents? That is why I have suggested that the Senate Democrats reconsider his holding the position of minority leader.
“Every act of political violence (and there have been hundreds) in the last several Presidential elections has been committed by a Democrat.”
Someone should tell that to the dead girl in Charlottesville.
Remember Kavanaugh’s speech?
“He claimed the Democrats were seeking “revenge for the Clintons†and invoked the Bible: “You sowed the wind, now I fear that the whole country will reap the whirlwind.†”
I suspect he was trying to send that message back but he really botched it. Should apologize and say it came out wrong. But, if there is anything people have learned from Trump, you should never apologize. Just be an assho@e and then people will defend because it is just your brash New Yorker style. Whoa! That explains it, Schumer is from New York so this is OK. That’s what I have been hearing on this site for the last couple of months, though somehow I think that I will hear that this special exemption for New Yorkers only applies to Trump.
Steve
Rather than getting into a pissing contest over who did what when and to whom, I think it is more productive to set out the standard of behavior we should be demanding and apply it evenhandedly.
Steve, do you really see no difference between talking about “the Democrats” and singling out Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh?
“Actually, considering Justice Ginsburg’s direct statements about the president there’s an argument she should recuse herself but nonetheless I still think the president was wrong to make the suggestion publicly by name.â€
Whether she should recuse herself is either a matter of law or legal code of conduct. She shouldn’t have done it, and Trump should have kept his yap shut. That whole thing probably falls under turn the temperature down. Schumer’s comments are altogether different, and revealing of an unhealthy mindset.
PS – steve = the usual suspects.
This is just yet more evidence that partisans are willing to excuse or pull their punches whenever a member of their tribe does something bad. Such behavior is built into our DNA, but we no longer seem to be as interested in controlling our baser instincts.
I agree completely with your application of an even standard Dave. But as we’ve seen, those in the tank for Trump or the Democrats or the Bernie Bros or whoever make excuses and, when those fail, point to the other side and say, essentially, “he did it first” like children on the schoolyard. It’s really pathetic IMO, and I’m trying here to be charitable.
All one has to do is consider the reaction if Trump or McConnell had said what Schumer said about Ginsburg and Sotomayor. Those defending Schumer right now or yelling “but Trump!!” to excuse/distract would be singing a much different tune.
Spin and narrative control are like the battleships at Pearl Harbor, in that their effectiveness has already been strategically leapfrogged by advances in technology.
In the multi-polar world of social media, no one power has the battleship firepower to enforce narrative preferences. No one is convincing anyone. This new kerfuffle is just the latest in a long string of tired examples, yes?
“I think it is more productive to set out the standard of behavior we should be demanding and apply it evenhandedly.”
I’m with Dave here. But, I’d also say that the new standard IS that no one can run the narrative table anymore, and that all players need to adjust their strategic expectations accordingly.
I’d also add that I think this is a welcome development that is long overdue.
If we survive the current turbulence, we should eventually see a corresponding rise in civic virtues: specifically, a preference for temperate communications, and a genuine willingness to work together.
But we probably have a ways to go yet before that happens.
Schumer is said to have an IQ of 140+, so who knows whether it was just intemperate speech.
I am interested in what this will do with the case at hand – for Kavanaugh’s / Gorsuch / Roberts votes.
If they were to rule to uphold the restrictions – Schumer could say he had a point in making the threat. If they were to strike down the restrictions, they look like they were bending to political pressure — and perhaps justifying Schumer in saying those words (if you believe the ends justify the means).
They could try a Solomon like split; through I am not sure that can be done in practice.
Even smart people can say dumb things. Virtues are habits; they are acquired through practice. Prudence is a virtue. Intelligence is not a virtue.
Dave- There is a difference, but as I said I think he botched it. He was trying to be clever and tough. Imitating Kavanaugh. Plus, context matters. If Schumer had a history of saying stuff like this it would be really worrisome. He doesn’t. If he doesn’t apologize or walk it back, then it is worrisome.
Steve
It is good Schumer cooled the temperature down.
Intelligence is not a virtue — it is my observation that intelligence, especially someone who succeeds in politics through intelligence rather then charm, is correlated with impulse control.