by Lev Tsitrin
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that Democrats have been endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable Rights, among them filling the Seats on the Supreme Court.”
This is the apparent premise of “If Only John Roberts Would Retire,” an amusing fantasy by one Pamela Paul, the New York Times‘ “Opinion Columnist.” Accusing Roberts of not controlling “Federalist Society-stamped fanatics on the right,” and thus failing to “lead the court toward any semblance of justice for all,” Ms Paul notes that “In retiring, he could help restore public confidence in the court and ensure its future.” Why the resulting progressive tilt of the court should be inherently better than the present, conservative one, she does not explain — this to her is an obvious, “self-evident truth.”
Well, I know a thing or two about the courts, and their coverage by the New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media, so I have an equally patriotic counter-suggestion for Ms. Paul. Since her New York Times is not any more forthright, truthful and patriotic than federal judges are (when it comes to news coverage the paper minds above all its ideological and business interests and spreads oceans of ink over acres of paper to construct a misleading, smoke-and-mirrors picture of courts while never reporting that, in clear violation of the Constitutionally-guaranteed “due process of the law,” judges feel free to adjudicate their own argument rather than the argument given them for adjudication by the parties — and, to add insult to injury, they gave themselves (in Pierson v Ray) the scandalous right to act from the bench “maliciously and corruptly” (which the New York Times and their ilk refuse to even mention, let alone investigate)) — so why, for the sake of the common good, won’t Ms. Paul resign from the New York Times, letting me become the New York Times‘ “Opinion Columnist” as someone much more competent to write on this hugely important subject? Ms. Paul expects Chief Justice Roberts to patriotically resign — so why would Mr. Paul be any less patriotic? Her resignation, and my appointment, would benefit the public tremendously: to quote from her own piece, I “could restore a smidgen of balance to an institution ideologically out of whack” — the New York Times, that is — not to mention fixing the Court.
So do we have a deal, Ms. Paul? When are you resigning from the New York Times, and when do I take up my position as the paper’s “Opinion Columnist” so the paper could move, to quote you again, “toward positions that more broadly reflect the opinions of most Americans, rather than those of an extremist faction”?
Please let me know, Ms. Paul. Impressed by your patriotism, I expect you to act as selflessly as you expect Mr. Roberts to act, and I am waiting to take up your position (at which I will be infinitely better than you) with the same baited breath with which you are waiting for Chief Justice Roberts to announce his retirement.
Lev Tsitrin is the founder of the Coalition Against Judicial Fraud, cajfr.org