Opinion | Mitch McConnell uses empty words on the Supreme Court’s legitimacy

Many of the biggest decisions now hinge on the reversal of “settled law” — as in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (school prayer) and Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (abortion access), both in 2022.

I find this especially disturbing when used to abandon minority protections that conflict with other rights — as in 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (public accommodation) and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (affirmative action), both in recent weeks. And then there is the aggressive use of the “major questions doctrine” — as in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (climate change) in 2022 and Biden v. Nebraska (student loans) this year.

I appreciate that the senator has a pig he needs to sell, but he needs to take it all the way out of that poke if he wants to sell it to me.

Janet Kinzer, Silver Spring

Ruth Marcus: McConnell built a conservative Supreme Court. Why doesn’t he want you to know?

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) corrupted the constitutional process to sneak two Federalist Society ideologues onto the Supreme Court, producing a court that will remain ideologically slanted to the right for decades.

And now, in his July 11 op-ed, Mr. McConnell used manipulated statistics to conceal the reality of the court’s reactionary tilt and protested that this is not “a conservative majority that puts jurisprudence above politics,” but a court that is “ideologically unpredictable.” What utter rubbish.

In key cases, the court has been driven by naked ideology and unprincipled hypocrisy. After swearing to respect precedent to gain their lifetime appointments, the justices tossed out not just precedent but “super precedent” on abortion and privacy rights — a decision rooted profoundly in dogma, not principle. And in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the court ignored not only 13 of the 27 words in the Second Amendment (“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State”) but also jurisprudence going back at least to 1939 that upheld reasonable restrictions on gun rights.

With other constitutional rights, the court has always applied balancing tests, weighing individual rights against public interests. But Justice Clarence Thomas decreed in Bruen that gun rights are sacrosanct against any limits not rooted in the 18th century — mass killings and other 20th- or 21st-century phenomena be damned.

I’m not sure quite what Mr. McConnell is trying to sell, but I’m not buying.

Kamil Ismail, Ellicott City

In his July 11 op-ed, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) wrote that “fidelity to the Constitution as it is written means checking ideology at the door.” So says the man who, for nearly a year, blocked President Barack Obama’s appointment to the Supreme Court of Merrick Garland and who rushed the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett just weeks before an election.

Though the statistics compiled by Mr. McConnell’s staff were interesting, his use of the words “thuggery,” “outrageous” and “liberal peanut gallery” to make his points was irksome. In an op-ed in which Mr. McConnell decried partisanship, he was himself guilty of it.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) wrote that neither party should be able to count on the Supreme Court for rulings that advance a partisan political agenda. I agree. But no one knows better than the minority leader that the majority on the court is packed with right-wing die-hards — because he is the one who broke with congressional procedure and precedent to steal two Supreme Court seats.

Mr. McConnell’s strategy is to blow moderate smoke at some cases in a transparent attempt to justify right-wing activism on other cases — those most important to his party’s political funders. Racism in college admissions. LGBTQ+ discrimination. Abortion. All 6-3 decisions. All an assault on American freedoms that overturned decades of precedent.

Mr. McConnell is asking us to ignore the clear pattern: These are the cases that draw out the partisanship and extremism in the right-wing court majority and deliver for the far-right Republicans who put them there. Most Americans, including the 60 percent of Americans who have lost faith in the court, can see right through the smoke.

Edward J. Markey, Washington

The writer, a Democrat, represents Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate.