CBS Legal Correspondent Crawford: Supreme Court Will Appear Politicized Because Democrats Opposed Alito

It appears CBS has themselves a good little Republican water-carrier in the form of their legal correspondent Jan Crawford. Crawford apparently thinks
up

It appears CBS has themselves a good little Republican water-carrier in the form of their legal correspondent Jan Crawford. Crawford apparently thinks that the Supreme Court has been politicized not by the fact that our court now is one of the most right wing, pro-corporate courts in history, but instead politicized because the Democrats had problems with the nomination of Sam Alito.

I hate to break it to Jan Crawford but if the Supreme Court looks politicized right now, that's because it is. It's extremely politicized in that everything corporate America does is right and anyone opposing that power is wrong. And you don't have to have the mentality of a 12 year old to hope to see that trend reversed and to know that Alito and Roberts were going to do nothing but continue to take the court in the direction that favors the corporate elite above average citizens.

Quite frankly I don't think most Americans are even paying attention to the hearings now, didn't pay attention to Sam Alito's nomination and couldn't tell you how many votes Alito got. I don't think sadly most Americans can even tell you who's on the Supreme Court and who nominated them, much less how many votes they got when they were confirmed.

What I can tell you is that even the people I work with that don't follow politics much do know that the Supreme Court just gave corporations the right to buy our elections, and don't like it.

Media Matters has done a good job of following Crawford's hackery and given her past reporting, this newest clap-trap of comparing Senators who had legitimate concerns about where a nominee is taking the Supreme Court to 12 year olds shouldn't come as much of a surprise. She looks like she's getting her talking points right out of the latest RNC email of the day.

Transcript via Lexis Nexis below the fold.

DICKERSON: Jan, I want to ask you now about the other big story this week, which is Elena Kagan in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee for a number of grueling days. Is she going to get nominated?

CRAWFORD: She’s definitely going to be confirmed.

DICKERSON: Excuse me, get -- excuse me, confirmed.

CRAWFORD: No, I mean, there’s no question about that. And, again, I mean, one of the other things Senator Graham said was -- you know, I mean, he wouldn’t tell you, but he basically told you, saying she was more candid than any nominee in the past.

But I think the thing we have to think about when we’re thinking about Supreme Court confirmation hearings is how they are so different now. And the fact that we’re even talking about, is she going to get confirmed? How are you going to vote, Senator?

Historically, she would have been confirmed like Justice Ginsburg was, 96-3, or Justice Breyer, 87-9, but things changed. I mean, things changed 10 years ago, when Democrats started filibustering President Bush’s qualified nominees.

I had a talk about all this -- I guess, what, five or six years ago with Mitch McConnell. You know, he said memories are long in the U.S. Senate. People remember what the Democrats -- including President Obama, Vice President Biden, Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy -- did.

They not only voted against Sam Alito, who is just as qualified as Elena Kagan in really every way, had liberal support. They voted to block his nomination. So in some ways, what goes around comes around.

She’s going to get confirmed, but there’s also a little bit of payback here, and she’s not going to get 96 votes like Justice Ginsburg. And the - - the -- the problem with that is that it damages -- ultimately, the loser, it’s not Elena Kagan. She’s going to get confirmed. It’s the courts. I mean, it makes the Supreme Court look in the people’s mind politicized. When you have these bipartisan votes on qualified nominees, the danger is the court itself looks political. And I think that’s a real problem long term.

DICKERSON: And there were times where senators seemed to be making that case you were saying, preparing for the next time this comes around, saying we’re going to use those quotes again next time.

CRAWFORD: But, you know, I mean, listen, I mean, in some ways, it’s like, you know, my 9-year-old will say, "You know, she started it," referring to my 6-year-old. At some point, somebody has got to be a grown- up and say, "Listen, I don’t care who started it. We’re going to stop it, and let’s realize what the stakes are here."

DICKERSON: We need some 12-year-olds in the Senate.

About Heather

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.