Remember when they said Trump was ‘the’ existential threat to the rule of law?

Reporters call for White House to ‘simply ignore’ Supreme Court decisions

Some reporters are calling on President Biden to ignore Supreme Court decisions that they believe are politically motivated.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court temporarily reinstated a Trump-era that limits the power of the states to block energy projects that can potentially pollute rivers, streams and other waterways. In a split 5-4 decision, the justices overturned a lower court judge’s order to throw out the rule until the Biden administration can implement a new rule which is expected in spring 2023.

Democrats condemned the decision, but some reporters went even further and called for the Biden administration to ignore the Supreme Court.

Former Niskanen Center Vice President for Research Will Wilkinson posted a Twitter thread explaining why he believes the White House should ignore SCOTUS decisions.

“If SCOTUS rules on regulation without a hearing or argument, the administration should simply ignore it and state that, in the absence of a normal process judicial review, it sees the court’s judgments as advisory but not binding,” Wilkinson tweeted.

Will Wilkinson tweeted "If SCOTUS rules on regulation without a hearing or argument, the administration should simply ignore it and state that, in the absence of a normal process judicial review, it sees the court’s judgments as advisory but not binding."

“The court famously has no enforcement authority. It’s authority is based in acceptance of the court’s legitimacy. But it can’t do whatever the hell it wants however it wants and expect deference. [E]xecutive ought to brush off the court’s junta-like attempts to rule by edict,” he added.

Wilkinson said the courts are behaving in a “political way” so it deserves “political pushback.”

The thread was retweeted by \New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie who added his own commentary.

“The court does not stand above or outside the constitutional system, and when it oversteps its boundaries, other constitutional actors have the right to push back either formally or informally,” he tweeted.

Jamelle Bouie tweeted "the court does not stand above or outside the constitutional system, and when it oversteps its boundaries, other constitutional actors have the right to push back either formally or informally"

Historian and Politico contributing editor Joshua Zeitz, responded to Bouie’s tweet, and said he had the same feeling.

 

Joshua Zeitz tweeted "It’s been my feeling for some time that Democrats should meet the erosion of democratic norms more forcefully. Obama should have said that Senate non/action on judicial nominations, including Garland, were implicit consent and that as of X date, they were judges/justices."

 

Zeitz continued, “The administration should similarly ignore shadow docket decisions as non-binding. SCOTUS can choose whether it wants to erode its own authority.”

Bloomberg Law reporter Robert Iafolla also reposted the entire thread, agreeing with the “shadow docket” description of the court.

“54% of U.S. adults said they have a favorable opinion of SCOTUS as of January 2022, down from 70% in August 2020, according to Pew Research Center. The court’s growing legitimacy problem coincides with its expanded use of the shadow docket,” Iafolla tweeted.

Robert Iakolla tweeted "54% of U.S. adults said they have a favorable opinion of SCOTUS as of January 2022, down from 70% in August 2020, according to Pew Research Center The court's growing legitimacy problem coincides with its expanded use of the shadow docket."