Constitutional expert warns Supreme Court justice is trying to manipulate court decisions

Democrats and other leftists have been demanding changes at the Supreme Court since President Donald Trump appointed three justices, all relatively conservative, taking away a majority liberals had held for decades.

Some extremists have gone way over the edge of reality.

Recently Panos Anastasiou, 76, of Alaska, was indicted for threatening to torture and kill six of the justices, presumably the conservatives.

Another suspect, Nicolas Roske, 28, will be on trial next year for trying to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Even a political icon like Sen. Chuck Schumer took his turn attacking and threatening the court – verbally at least.

He said, at a rally promoting the deaths of unborn children, “I want to tell you, [Neil] Gorsuch, I want to tell you, [Brett] Kavanaugh, you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price.”

But now the attacks on the court appear to be coming from inside, and not just from a clerk or other employee who might have violated ethics codes and prematurely released the opinion that overturned the long-held but faulty Roe court opinion from 1973 that created a federal right to abortion without having any grounding in the Constitution.

Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University,” said that was “one of the greatest reaches of ethics in the court’s history.

But it gets even worse.

Now, he said, “the New York Times has published highly detailed accounts of the internal deliberations of the court. The account seemed largely directed at the conservative justices and (Chief Justice John) Roberts.”

“Some of the information on deliberations in three cases (Trump v. Anderson, Fischer v. United States, and Trump v. United States) had to come either directly or indirectly from a justice. Some of these deliberations were confined to members of the court,” he noted.

That means someone on the court, likely a liberal justice, is actively trying to manipulate the court to obtain some undefined results.

He warned the new information that was leaked “could only have originated with a justice.”

Controversial decisions, like abortion, on which the court has ruled, have cut significantly until the public’s approval of the court, and not even half view the justices favorably.

However, Turley said, there are those who want to express their criticism in a bigger way.

Besides the criminal cases, and the threatening Schumer rhetoric, he pointed out some have suggested cutting of the court’s air conditioning to “make them retire.”

The result is that Roberts now has to deal with leaks “coming out of the confidential conference sessions and memoranda of the justices.”

The result, he explained, could be that case decisions could be manipulated.

The critics have discussed a mandated code of ethics, in which “lower court judges” effectively would be able to judge the justices, even order them off of cases.

Two of the leftist judges, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Jackson, have endorsed the idea.

However, such judgments could “flip the outcome on a closely divide court,” Turley pointed out.

“The court is now in an undeniable crisis of faith,” Turley warned. “For decades, institutional faith and fealty have maintained confidentiality and civility. Once again, that tradition has been shattered by the reckless and self-serving conduct of those entrusted with the court’s business.”