Ahead of the 2022-2023 Supreme Court term, Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Elena Kagan, and Justice Neil Gorsuch are speaking up about the legitimacy of the Supreme Court after the Court's decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, was leaked earlier this year. Chief Justice Roberts spoke to a group of lawyers and judges last week where he specifically addressed those who seek to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the Supreme Court simply because they disagree with its decisions:

Chief Justice John Roberts said disagreement with the Supreme Court’s decisions is “not a basis for criticizing the legitimacy of the court,” on Friday in his first public remarks since the Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

It appears that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has quietly "un-recused" herself from the UNC affirmative action case coming before the Court during its 2022-2023 term. As Dan McLaughlin explained, the case was previously consolidated with a case implicating Harvard in a similar alleged violation:

As I set forth in detail back in February, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has an obligation to recuse herself from the pending case on racial preferences in Harvard admissions because she sat on the Harvard Board of Overseers not only during the events under challenge — which are ongoing — but also during the yearslong defense of the litigation, including at the Supreme Court. Justice Jackson agreed, and testified at her confirmation hearing that she would recuse. But Jackson’s recusal obligation should have extended as well to the consolidated case, for two reasons: because Harvard was engaged in a joint defense of the case with the University of North Carolina (the two cases were consolidated) and because a victory for UNC could redound to the benefit of Harvard in the event that the Court divided 4-4 or reached a fractured outcome in the Harvard case (granting that the two legal standards could end up differing). . .

Polling recently commissioned by the Judicial Crisis Network shows that Americans wholeheartedly reject the intimidation and violence that pro-abortion activists have promoted in the wake of Roe v. Wade being overturned last month. Over half of the respondents believed that the law against protesting at Supreme Court Justices houses should be enforced by Attorney General Merrick Garland and believed that such protests undermine democracy. The Federalist reported:

Americans do not believe it is right to protest outside the home of Supreme Court justices or conduct protests that interfere with the justices’ personal lives, a new poll found.

On Friday, the Biden Administration announced its 24th round of judicial nominees, bringing President Biden's total number of judicial nominees to 132. Each new slate of nominees illustrates the Administration's goal of placing radicals in the judiciary. This time, it's abortion activist Julie Rikelman, nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit:

Conservative opposition is expected in the U.S. Senate, where Democrats are facing pressure from progressive activists to speed up judicial confirmations before the Nov. 8 midterm elections, when they risk losing control of the chamber to Republicans.

The far left’s efforts to intimidate, harass, and even do harm to Supreme Court justices have taken another nasty turn: 

A group offering bounty payments for sightings of conservative Supreme Court justices is the latest harassment campaign prompting Republican lawmakers to call for immediate action by the Justice Department.

While it is definitely the right thing to do to protect Supreme Court justices and all judges, it may also be what the law demands:

In what many believe to be the most momentous term in decades, the Supreme Court delivered a multitude of wins for originalism. This term's historic decisions should come with a great sense of pride for Justice Clarence Thomas. After years of fighting an uphill battle, Justice Thomas finally has enough support from other Justices on the Court to be in the majority. 

The past week has been a good week for both Republicans and open, fair, and honest elections.  It has also been a downright bad and ugly week for the Democrat Party’s consigliere, Marc Elias.  

First, the good: Yesterday, a New York Supreme Court Judge ruled that (like virtually everywhere else in the world) you have to be a citizen to vote in New York City:

Staten Island Supreme Court Justice Ralph Porzio also issued a permanent injunction that bars the city Board of Elections from letting around 800,000 non-citizen residents register to vote.

In a 13-page ruling, Porzio said city officials can’t “obviate” restrictions in the state constitution, which “expressly states that only citizens meeting the age and residency requirements are entitled to register and vote in elections.”

“There is no statutory ability for the City of New York to issue inconsistent laws permitting non-citizens to vote and exceed the authority granted to it by the New York State Constitution,” he wrote.

The Supreme Court held today in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District that when life gives you Lemon [v. Kurtzman], you strike it down for good.  This notoriously troublesome Establishment Clause test, which Justice Scalia likened to “some ghoul in a late-night horror movie” that somehow keeps coming back to life, is conclusively and finally dead.   

Religious liberty wins again at the Supreme Court this term, and today’s opinion ensures it will continue to do so in the future.

In a rare Friday decision announcement, the Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson, the most anticipated case of the term, holding that “[t]he Constitution does not confer a right to abortion.”  This is a historic and monumental win for the rule of law and the proper role of the courts.

At last, Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey have been overturned after decades of litigation by pro-life advocates and those who support following the text of the Constitution.  The authority to regulate abortion is now returned from the federal courts to where it belongs: the people and their elected representatives.

Leading up to the impending U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization, which will decide whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional, Republicans keep winning in the courts while liberals resort to violence. 

One of these Republican wins happened today in the Iowa Supreme Court, which held that abortion "rights" are not protected by the state constitution, a move that paves the way for lawmakers to strengthen pro-life laws in the state.