NBC News opinion scoffs at the idea justices shouldn’t be harassed outside their homes: ‘Double standard’
'Kavanaugh’s presumption of personal inviolability, however, is strikingly at odds with the draft decision he appears to support about abortion.'
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}Demonstrators in support of reproductive rights protest outside of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh's home in Chevy Chase, Maryland, near Washington, U.S., May 7, 2022. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein
An NBC News opinion column by Noah Berlatsky Tuesday complained about Supreme Court justices and their defenders claiming they shouldn’t be harassed or intimidated over the leaked draft opinion.
Berlatsky’s take was that they aren’t really being threatened and, even if they were, it’s nothing compared to the "monstrous abuses" they’re inflicting on the populace by dismantling Roe v Wade.
The author began his piece attacking the branch of government designed to be separated from popular passions through lifetime appointments with an appeal to "the principle that power must be accountable if it is not to be tyrannical." He then implied that the recently leaked Supreme Court draft opinion – that signals the potential end of Roe v Wade – shows that Supreme Court justices are doing tyrannical things.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}"Yet, the recent debate over abortion rights has illustrated once again that too many Americans in positions of power would prefer a populace that acquiesced silently to even monstrous abuses," Berlatsky wrote.
In this Oct. 8, 2018, file photo, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh stands before a ceremonial swearing-in in the East Room of the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)
ACTIVIST GROUP THREATENS TO ‘BURN EUCHARIST’ IN DISPLAY OF ‘DISGUST’ TOWARD CATHOLICS: ‘BIGOTRY’
He decried the idea that Justice Brett Kavanaugh has been harassed or intimidated after the leak and insisted the protests outside of his Chevy Chase, Maryland, home have been peaceful.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}"The protest at Kavanaugh’s house was peaceful — as you can see from video shot during it. Yet, many pundits and officials reacted as if they were staring down the barrel of an incoming revolution," he wrote.
He dismissed White House press secretary Jen Psaki's tweet "declaring that protests ‘should never include violence, threats, or vandalism’" because "again, the protesters going viral were nonviolent and seemed to have committed no vandalism." Berlatsky solely focused on brief videos of protests outside Kavanaugh's house, ignoring protests at other justices' houses and actions across the country at various locations that did include violence, threats and vandalism.
Still, Berlatsky pivoted to arguing that Kavanaugh and those concerned for his safety and well-being need to look in the mirror and consider the danger he’s causing to others with the potential Roe ruling.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}"It’s true that nonviolent protesting outside someone’s house can be uncomfortable and annoying for the target of said protest," Berlatsky claimed, adding that Kavanaugh "isn’t accustomed to having his privacy disturbed or his personal space impinged upon."
WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 04: Workers assemble non-scalable fences around the Supreme Court Building amid ongoing abortion-rights demonstrations on May 4, 2022 in Washington, DC. Demonstrations across the country continue as abortion-rights and anti-abortion advocates react to the leaked initial draft majority opinion indicating the U.S. Supreme Court would overturn two abortion-related cases, which would end federal protection of abortion rights. (Photo by Sarah Silbiger/Getty Images)
He continued, stating, "Kavanaugh’s presumption of personal inviolability, however, is strikingly at odds with the draft decision he appears to support about abortion." That it's not at odds with the presumption that judges shouldn't be subject to outside pressure and coercion while deciding a case is left unremarked upon.
The author justified protests at justices' homes because the decision, "if implemented, would mean lawmakers could extend state-sanctioned power and violence not just into homes but also into uteruses."
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}Berlatsky attempted to make the point that these justices believe they can’t be mistreated, but they have enacted horrible mistreatment on women by striking down "buffer zones" outside abortion clinics.
He provided an example of this "double-standard," as he referred to it, saying, "an 8-foot fence has been erected around the Supreme Court building so justices don’t have to interact with protesters who object to their assault on abortion rights."
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}Abortion-rights protesters wave flags during a demonstration outside of the U.S. Supreme Court, Sunday, May 8, 2022, in Washington. A draft opinion suggests the Supreme Court could be poised to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case that legalized abortion nationwide, according to a Politico report. ((AP Photo/Gemunu Amarasinghe))
"The majority of the Supreme Court believes that pregnant, poor, desperate people who try to access reproductive health care should have to brave a gantlet of abuse and potential violence. Supreme Court justices themselves can keep protesters from their workplace and are, according to powerful politicians and members of the commentariat, also supposed to be insulated from nonviolent protesters in their private lives," he wrote.
Berlatsky then provided the example of how Kavanaugh is in a happy safe neighborhood, while his sexual assault accuser Christine Blasey Ford has reportedly had a rough go. "Ford has had to move four times because of death threats. Meanwhile, Kavanaugh is happily ensconced in Chevy Chase, where mild threats to his privacy are decried by supporters as unacceptable violence."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}"This disproportion is the essence of tyranny," Berlatsky concluded. "The unelected deciders are not to be confronted, or even questioned. Those who are decided upon, in contrast, have little inherent right to life, to liberty, to pleasure or to their own bodies. The bland language of deference and the cruel language of obedience are one language. It is the language of authoritarianism. And a country in which the powerful can seize rights and bodies without even nonviolent protest is not a democracy."