Do you see how you were played conservatives? When some of my colleagues said that a vote against Kavanaugh would let the liberals win, they didn’t know what they were talking about. Now, Kavanaugh has demonstrated, as many of us said he would, himself to not be a constitutional judge nor a conservative one. On Monday, Kavanaugh joined Chief Justice John Roberts and the liberal judges on the court to reject hearing a case brought by states that sought to bar Planned Parenthood from receiving Medicaid funding.
The court rejected appeals from Kansas and Louisiana, which sought to overturn federal appeals court rulings barring them from cutting off the medical provider’s funding. The court’s order announcing its decision not to hear the cases does not list how each of the justices voted.
But Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the decision. He was joined by fellow conservatives Justices Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito. Four justices must agree to take up a case in order for the court to hear it. The court would have taken up the case had either Kavanaugh or Roberts, the chief justice, wanted to do so.
Kavanaugh’s decision is particularly notable. Anti-abortion groups celebrated his confirmation in October and many assumed his ascension to the bench would solidify a conservative majority that would take on abortion rights. The cases the court declined to hear Monday did not directly concern the legality of abortion, though Planned Parenthood is a frequent target of lawmakers who oppose it. In his dissent, Thomas said his colleagues’ decision was rooted in the abortion issue though the cases themselves were not.
The cases stemmed from controversial videos released in 2015 by the anti-abortion group Center for Medical Progress.
And here are these protecting the guilty.
First, if the court understood that Medicaid is unconstitutional in the first place, it would have heard the case. Second, if the court actually was constitutional and conservative and understood that the murder of the unborn in the womb is a crime, they would have heard the case.
Judge Kavanaugh, apparently, doesn’t understand either of these things and demonstrated that he view Roe v. Wade as settled law, which is something many of us warned about before he was confirmed.
While I defended him against unsubstantiated claims, I also raised the flag about this kind of judge, one that bases his ruling on precedence and not the Constitution, as well as his involvement in the cover-up of the Vince Foster “suicide” and his blatant disregard for the Fourth Amendment.
Still, the Senate confirmed him and conservatives praised the confirmation.
Planned Parenthood was all too happy with the high court leaving in place a lesser court’s ruling in the matter, even though this is a case they should be hearing, according to the Constitution.
“We are pleased that lower court rulings protecting patients remain in place,” Planned Parenthood President Leana Wen said in a statement. “Every person has a fundamental right to health care, no matter who they are, where they live, or how much they earn.”
VICTORY: SCOTUS just allowed lower court rulings to stand in Medicaid “defunding” cases. This decision protects Medicaid patients who rely on Planned Parenthood for birth control, cancer screenings, and STD testing and treatment. https://t.co/XTTTeQPpgF
— Planned Parenthood Action (@PPact) December 10, 2018
Oh, it’s a victory alright… for criminals.
And on top of the things Planned Parenthood mentioned, it also provides for the murdering of babies by dismemberment, beheading and burning.
and murdering their babies by dismemberment, beheading and burning.
— Tim Brown (@FPPTim) December 10, 2018
In a statement, Americans United for Life President Catherine Glenn Foster said she was “disappointed” by the court’s decision, but “the good news is that there are other similar cases pending in lower courts, which may give the Supreme Court another opportunity to decide this important issue.”
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented from Monday’s decision. They said they believed the court did not get involved because the issue of abortion was at play.
“What explains the court’s refusal to do its job here? I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named ‘Planned Parenthood,’” Thomas wrote.
“Some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue,” he added, “does not justify abdicating our judicial duty.”
Thomas continued, “Because of this court’s inaction, patients in different states — even patients with the same providers — have different rights to challenge their state’s provider decisions.”
There’s also a states’ rights issue at play here and Thomas pointed that out.
“The question presented also affects the rights of the states,” Thomas wrote. “Not only are the lawsuits themselves a financial burden on the states, but the looming potential for complex litigation inevitably will dissuade state officials from making decisions that they believe to be in the public interest. … Moreover, allowing patients to bring these claims directly in federal court reduces the ability of states to manage Medicaid, as the suits give Medicaid providers ‘an end run around the administrative exhaustion requirements in [the] state’s statutory scheme’.”
Over at The Washington Examiner, Quin Hillyer said that Kavanaugh did “real damage to principles of federalism.”
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas rightfully excoriated six of his colleagues for refusing to consider a high-profile case involving Planned Parenthood — and, in the process, further ramped up fears on the political right that new justice Brett Kavanaugh is less of a judicial conservative than the court needs.
Even some of us who strongly defended Kavanaugh from smears once he was nominated had earlier expressed concerns about his jurisprudential approach. Today, not only did he join Chief Justice John Roberts and the four justices often identified as “liberal” in punting away the case at hand, but he also did real damage to principles of federalism that the high court should be upholding.
When different federal appeals courts reach diametrically opposed conclusions on important matters of federal law, the Supreme Court almost always grants certiorari to consider the case, thus resolving the dispute and the confusion. If four of the nine justices vote to grant cert, the high court will indeed hear the case. But today, only justices Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch voted to hear the case, thus leaving in place the lower court decisions.
Only four judges were needed to hear the case. As far as I’m concerned, Justice Kavanaugh demonstrated that he is not a constitutional conservative judge. He was chosen to stimy rulings with regard to the law. He is a compromised judge. He and the others opposed to this case should be immediately impeached.