Written by Christopher P. Finney
Today’s NYT contains yet more preemptive gnashing of teeth about the claimed radically-conservative U.S. Supreme Court: Scalia’s Putsch at the Supreme Court.
In that opinion piece, Contributing Op-Ed Writer Linda Greenhouse demonizes in the strongest manner liberals can our esteemed co-counsel over the years in a number of cases, Michael Carvin of Jones Day: “a leading figure behind the two failed challenges to the Affordable Care Act.”
Then, she attacks Friedrichs not on the intellectual clarity of the compelled speech argument, but rather — heaven forbid — that the decision represents change for a country weary of change, quoting with favor Justice Breyer: “You start overruling things, what happens to the country thinking of us as a kind of stability in a world that is tough because it changes a lot?”
Regardless of how you view the expected outcome in Firebricks, one has to see the irony in the NYT and SCOTUS gnashing teeth about “change” right after the Court’s legalization of gay marriage, and the host of other judicially-imposed societal adjustments foisted upon a nation by these nine “legislators.”
