This article may contain commentary
which reflects the author’s opinion.
A pair of Supreme Court justices have responded to rising threats of violence against federal judges as well as mischaracterizations from left-wing Democrats that the court’s conservative majority is “politicizing” its rulings.
In an interview with Fox News Digital, Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, he spoke to “heightened security concerns for members of the Supreme Court after the 2022 leak of the court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which sparked protests outside justices’ homes and intensified fears about their safety, particularly after the attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh,” Fox reported.
Gorsuch highlighted that the current political environment, characterized by increasingly heated public discourse and breaches of court confidentiality, poses greater risks to the institution. “We have to be able to hear one another,” Gorsuch said. “And violence is never the answer.”
Advertisement
His remarks come as members of the federal judiciary have faced heightened security threats in recent years, including an assassination attempt targeting Brett Kavanaugh ahead of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization ruling, which overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the federal constitutional right to abortion.
Advertisement
On June 8, 2022, Nicholas John Roske, of Simi Valley, traveled to Kavanaugh’s home in Maryland with a firearm and ammunition in a checked suitcase. According to the United States Department of Justice, authorities also found a tactical knife, zip ties, duct tape, a hammer, a crowbar, lock-picking tools, and other items in his possession.
After noticing deputy U.S. Marshals stationed outside the residence, Roske left the area and called 911, telling a dispatcher he was experiencing homicidal and suicidal thoughts and had traveled from California with the intent to kill a Supreme Court justice.
Gorsuch stopped short of addressing specific incidents but told Fox News Digital that maintaining civil discourse and respecting institutional boundaries are essential to preserving the Supreme Court’s role and the independence of the federal judiciary.
“There’s a balance between transparency and [the] confidentiality in our work, right?” Gorsuch said. “I mean, it’s wonderful, I think, that we have the opportunity for people to listen in to our own arguments. You can listen to every word uttered in arguments from the bench today, in real time.
Advertisement
“At the same time, we also have to be able to talk with one another privately and discuss our views candidly around the conference table,” he added.
Meanwhile, on Wednesday, Roberts defended the Supreme Court against misconceptions held by the American public, saying he believes that he and his colleagues are often seen as “political actors” making decisions based on policy rather than law.
During a conference for lawyers and judges in Hershey, Roberts stated that the Supreme Court must make decisions that are not always popular. He expressed concern that the public lacks a better understanding of how the court functions, which is largely due to Democrats mischaracterizing the high court as a political tool for the right.
Advertisement
“I think at a very basic level, people think we’re making policy decisions, [that] we’re saying we think this is what things should be as opposed to this is what the law provides,” Roberts, who was appointed by George W. Bush, said. “I think they view us as truly political actors, which I don’t think is an accurate understanding of what we do. I would say that’s the main difficulty.”
He acknowledged the right to criticize the court and its decisions, but noted a tendency to emphasize political aspects too much.
“We’re not simply part of the political process, and there’s a reason for that, and I’m not sure people grasp that as much as is appropriate,” Roberts said.
“One of the things we have to do is issue decisions that are unpopular,” he said, adding that those rulings are “based on our best effort to figure out what the Constitution means and how it applies.”
