That America hasn’t historically been the kind of country that would do something like enact and enforce laws banning contraception between married couples, inter-racial marriage, elective abortion, etc. is such an absurd claim on its face that naturally these opinions don’t come right out and say something like that.

I mean…he’s not wrong. America is definitely the kind of country that would do exactly that.

Whitewashing history, even for noble reasons, is bad.

I don’t think that means what he thinks it does…

Now the difference between right wing and liberal judicial legislation here is striking, in that, with the exception of affirmative action, liberal judicial legislation, as noted above, has tracked actual or emerging national consensus on all the issues where it has legislated. Meanwhile, right wing judicial legislation has depended on the many anti-democratic features of the larger political system to allow it to impose judicially legislated outcomes that DO NOT have anything like majority national support: Most Americans support gun control, national health care, campaign finance reform, voting rights, and Democratic presidential candidates. So this isn’t actually a “both sides” situation, except in the most superficial sense.

Again, yes, thank you!

Also, to the extent that I agree the liberal judicial legislation tracks actual or emerging national consensus where it legislates, then it would seem to be fine. The will of the people and all that. Roe v. Wade’s rulings didn’t threaten to undermine the legitimacy of the Supreme Court in the same way that overturning it did. The problem of the current anti-democractic Supreme Court rulings is their lack of national support, imho, not that it’s judicial legislation.

But the bottom line here is that the role of the Supreme Court as a quasi-legislature in American politics is becoming increasingly problematic. What ought to be done about this is pretty straightforward: Term limits, an expanded SCOTUS, and the elimination of the Senate taking part in the confirmation process would be a good start.

I’m not quite convinced of that. Particularly, why would we eliminate the Senate taking part in the confirmation process? Imagine Trump just nominating Ted Cruz to the SCOTUS without any sort of confirmation hearing. Hell nah!