Skip to content
Breaking News Alert Boston Children's Hospital Touts Hysterectomies And Other Mutilation For 'Trans' Minors

Never Forget How Vicious And Violent Was The Left’s Top-To-Bottom Anti-Court Campaign

protesters at the Supreme Court
Image CreditChris Bedford / The Federalist

We had to fight hard to get Roe v. Wade overturned, and we can’t forget the hell they put us through to stop it.

Share

WASHINGTON, D.C. — “This is not normal.”

That was a phrase bandied about with some frequency during the Donald Trump years. You can still see it from time to time on the bumpers of cars, next to the fading “I’m With Her” sticker.

The left has weaponized the word “normal” to the point of farce. A secure border, fair trade, and fair defense deals were abnormal, we were told. Meanwhile, the administration that campaigned for normalcy instead ushered inflation into our economy, kicked nicotine out of cigarettes, and invited transvestite strippers into elementary school classrooms.

It becomes difficult to sort reality when words lose their meaning, which is why it’s easy to miss just how insane the unsuccessful campaign against the Supreme Court truly was.

While sure, a sitting chief executive lashing out at any and all critics on social media is a real departure from the modern presidency, the campaign of judicial espionage, targeted terror attacks and planned street violence — all either ignored or tacitly sanctioned by the leaders of the House, Senate and executive — was so far outside of normalcy that we haven’t seen it since the eve of the Civil War. The problem is that in politics, words now mean so little we sometimes struggle to categorize how abnormal our situation is.

It began inside the Supreme Court — a formal yet somehow collegial institution, where ideologically opposed justices clash on paper in an atmosphere of mutual respect and even friendship, and where ambitious clerks work tirelessly and professionally. For these very reasons, the court has become the last major American institution that commands broad respect among the people. That gravitas was tarnished when a draft abortion decision by Justice Samuel Alito was leaked to Politico.

Despite the promise of an intensive investigation, we still don’t know if the leaker was a justice, a clerk, or maybe even a clerk acting on behalf of a justice. But we do know this: The leak — more than six weeks before the final decision went public — was intended not simply to publicize the decision, but to alter it.

Worse yet, there’s evidence this plan could have worked. Indeed, it’s amazing it didn’t. Because while the Supreme Court of the United States has managed to maintain an honorable image (while even such vaunted and historically apolitical institutions as the U.S. military have become mired), that doesn’t mean it’s immune to outside pressure on even the weightiest of cases.

Chief Justice John Roberts, for example, infamously reversed his opinion on the Affordable Care Act after an intense political and media pressure campaign. But while feelings ran high during the Obamacare debate, there was never any honest expectation of violence.

On a question as intrinsically violent as abortion, however? Well, that’s another matter entirely.
Left-wing street violence has been steadily building for years (all while “This Isn’t Normal” bumper stickers flew off the shelves and onto leftist cars, mind you), including a conveniently forgotten pipe bomb planted at the Republican National Committee’s headquarters on Jan 6. So to be clear: Left-wing violence following the leak wasn’t just possible, it was virtually assured. The spy leaked it anyways — or more than “anyways,” because of.

The violence that followed the leak wasn’t minor. Instead, it was reminiscent of the backlash against civil rights. It’s included 18 Christian crisis pregnancy centers firebombed or otherwise vandalized, written and recorded threats directed at volunteers, and the attempted assassination of a presumed anti-abortion justice in his own home.

In the days following the leak, the streets and neighborhood surrounding the Supreme Court were shut down by unruly mobs. Weeks later, police responded in force to a publicly planned attack that fought to blockade the entrances and exits to the court. While the building itself remains heavily guarded — and deputies patrol outside justices’ homes — the terrorist group Jane’s Revenge put up posters around D.C. expressly calling for a violent riot if the court dared to send abortion back to the states.

None of this violence happened in a political vacuum, either. From Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s promise on the Supreme Court’s steps that justices “have released the whirlwind and will pay the price,” to Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s hoarse and bug-eyed curbside tantrum, the top Democratic brass loudly cheered on the mobs.

Over weeks of attacks, President Joe Biden repeatedly declined to condemn the terrorism against Christians and his political opponents, instead sending his press secretary out to condemn “all violence.”

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi delayed a bill for weeks that further protected the justices and their families. That bill passed the Senate unanimously yet sat in the House, but at the White House, the former spokeswoman said, “We certainly continue to encourage [peaceful protests] outside justices’ homes.”

When asked why she delayed the bill the morning after the attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the speaker said the justices weren’t under any immediate threat. She couldn’t say the truth: that the pro-abortion campaign of violence and intimidation against the court was just heating up. It was just as the politicians of Northern Virginia couldn’t adequately explain why they weren’t enforcing the law against protesting outside of judges’ homes.

To admit the truth might be a step too far, even in an American political environment where words have been so thoroughly debased.

The professional left has long understood that if you debase words, you debase truth; and that very type of environment allows you to control truth: to decide what is “riot” and what is “protest,” what is “mostly peaceful” and what is “violent,” what is “direct action” and what is “insurrection.”

What is “life,” and what is “choice.”

What is “normal,” and what is not.

What is truth, and what is fiction.

Despite the howls, the lies and the violence, they failed; but it won’t stop them. The Supreme Court persevered, and conservatives witnessed their most important victory since the defeat of the Soviet Union. We had to fight hard to get here, and we can’t forget the hell they put us through to stop it.

The fight goes back to our people now, where it belongs. For America, that means the fight is just beginning.