and trying to determine what's causing it, other than the GOP refusing to hold hearings on Judge Garland.
It's been really remarkable. Some of my liberal friends, including one who is a lawyer, even rejoiced over the Supreme Court reversing a decision he authored, an event that doesn't mean anything at all. To be a judge is to be reversed.
And then I read an article in the National Review on line that I think crystallized it.
Basically, the Democrats are Anti Democratic.
What this is all about is a fear that a Justice Gorsuch would apply the law as written. Democrats, who probably ought to rename themselves the Antidemocrats, hate that idea, as that would mean that their concepts for social revolution would have to go to the voters. . . who don't want it, or whom they fear don't want it.
At least since the early 1970s, and more likely dating back into the 60s, there's been some, granted a few, Supreme Court decisions of huge import that have no foundation in the Constitution. Obergefell is the most recent of those. The Obergefell decision is shockingly extra legal and it is based, at its essence, in social theory, not jurisprudence. The Democrats know that and they fear that a judge that sticks to the law won't make decisions like that.
They can likely rest easy that the damage done by Obergefell is in fact done for the time being a least, although if Roe v. Wade is any indicator it'll slowly become despised. Indeed, the Democrats have preservation of Roe, which at one time democracy loving liberals, when there were some, such as the The New Republic (before it was the sorry fish wrapper it is today) thought should be overruled. Now, the liberal Democrats, which has become nearly all of the Democrats, don't trust people or their legislators and would rather be ruled by the Platonic elite, the high nine of elderly sages who would enact their brave new world by fiat.
Well, long term, in the modern world, dictatorships don't last. We can either have courts that apply the law as written and leave the legislation to legislators, or we can have broad contempt of court until the courts don't matter anymore. I'll take the former.