On his nationally syndicated radio show Monday, host Mark Levin said that it’s difficult to understand why the Supreme Court is regarded as the most moral and just branch of government.
Discussing previous rulings made by the Supreme Court on his Monday show, Levin stated, “[G]iven the sheer inhumanity of these decisions, slavery, segregation, internment, it is difficult to understand why so many regard the Supreme Court as the most moral and just of the three branches of government.”
Mark Levin’s remarks came after Sens. Collins, Cantwell suggested that President Donald Trump’s upcoming U.S. Supreme Court nominee should hold to precedent concerning Roe v. Wade. As was reported by CNSNews.com, Sen. Susan Collins said specifically about the president’s nominee and the right to abortion, “I’m going to have an in-depth discussion with the nominee, and I believe very much that Roe v. Wade is settled law, as it has been described by Chief Justice Roberts. It has been established as a constitutional right for 46 year -- 45 years, and was reaffirmed 26 years ago.”
A transcript of Levin’s comments can be read below:
“We have judicial precedent in slavery, in segregation, and that segregation case Plessy lasted for 58 years, longer than Roe v. Wade – 1944. You know, you might say, ‘Well, look. That Plessy v. Ferguson was 1896. The Dred Scott case was 1856-57. These are modern times. The Supreme Court doesn’t do that stuff.’ Oh, yes it does. 1944, Korematsu v. United States, the Supreme Court upheld military orders issued by the Democrats’ favorite president, Franklin Roosevelt, establishing military authority for the forced internment of Americans during World War II. The Court’s opinion, only some 20 pages long, was devoid of any legitimate constitutional basis for upholding FDR’s orders. More than 110 thousand law-abiding individuals, mostly Japanese Americans and Americans of Japanese ancestry, were forcibly removed from their homes on the west coast and relocated to camps in the interior of the country and detained without cause.
“The 5th Amendment specifically states, quote, “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without the due process of law,” unquote. If this wasn’t a violation of the 5th Amendment, then what is? Rather than applying the clear language of the Constitution, this activist Democrat-controlled Supreme Court simply upheld FDR’s policy. And the Court dismissively concluded that war demands sacrifices and certain groups will have to bear certain burdens.
“And they trash Trump when it comes to Muslims, who never even suggested or thought about anything like this. But FDR is the great FDR.
“Now given the sheer inhumanity of these decisions – slavery, segregation, internment – it is difficult to understand why so many regard the Supreme Court as the most moral and just of the three branches of government.
“These cases are crucial to understanding the danger inherent in judicial activism. When the judiciary utilizes outcome-determinative reasoning rather than adhering to the Constitution, the result can be catastrophic.
“Activist Supreme Courts have justified slavery, segregation and racism. They helped precipitate the civil war and set back race relations for more than a century. But instead of learning the painful lessons of the past, that the Constitution must guide their approach to the law, several current Supreme Court justices are no less committed to judicial activism, and they have their defenders in the senate.
“And it’s amazing, Susan Collins believes in judicial precedent. Well, thank God Abraham Lincoln didn’t. Thank God the justices in Brown v. Board of Education didn’t. Thank God the current court, which finally reversed the basis for Korematsu, such as they were, didn’t.”