SCOTUS and the power of the purse

Trust is sine qua non in a democracy. Citizens simply must trust that those in power will follow the law. When that trust breaks down, it leads to assassinations, coups and civil war.

The idea that the SCOTUS is the final arbiter of what is and isn’t legal is based on nothing in the Constitution. Furthermore, the enforcement of any SCOTUS decision rests with the executive branch—the SCOTUS has no police force or army to coerce compliance.

The SCOTUS narrowly decided that the Trump administration must follow the law as set forth by Congress, supporting Congress’ power of the purse. Four justices dissented:

“Four conservative justices dissented from the decision ordering the administration to comply with the district court’s restraining order. The court’s decision amounted to “judicial hubris” that “imposes a $2 billion penalty on American taxpayers,” Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, wrote in dissent.”

Are Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh simpletons or just dishonest?

“That “$2 billion penalty,” however, is represented by congressionally appropriated funds that had already been paid out by the grant recipients to contractors. The plaintiffs in the case were mostly seeking to obtain the release of funds to cover expenses they had already spent.”

The longstanding bleat by the political right against the SCOTUS is “legislating from the bench.” But that’s precisely what Alito et al. are advocating. And they’re not hiding it.

SCOTUS minority opposes Congress