Jean-Pierre
said: “From day one, when, uh, when the Supreme Court made this extreme decision, uh, to take away, uh, uh, a constitutional right, uh, it was an unconstitul — unconstitutional action by them, a right that was around for almost fifty years, a right that women had to make a decision on their bodies, and how they wanna start their families…” This is not the sort of statement that yields to logical analysis, but it still raises questions: a constitutional right that was around for almost fifty years? Does Karine Jean-Pierre think that the Constitution was ratified in 1972?
Also, if Karine Jean-Pierre thinks that what the Supreme Court has done in overturning this “right” (actually, all it did was allow the states once again to make their own laws regarding abortion) was “unconstitutional,” what authority does she think exists within the American government to determine whether or not a Supreme Court is constitutional? Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan recently
said that “if over time the court loses all connection with the public and with public sentiment, that’s a dangerous thing for a democracy.” Does Jean-Pierre, too, believe that the Supreme Court’s decisions must accord with “public sentiment” or else the high court loses its legitimacy?
She likely does, unless, of course, “public sentiment” tends in a rightward direction, in which case she would certainly argue, if the Court decision leaned to the Left, that the Court had to adhere to the legal principle and not bow to popular opinion. Hey, whatever works.