New Threads for the Empress
On Thursday of last week, I read the Washington Post headline “In Narrow Ruling, Arkansas Supreme Court Keeps Abortion Off the Ballot.”
Arkansans for Limited Government gathered more than 101,500 signatures from registered voters in our state, supporting a measure that would allow Arkansas citizenry to vote on whether or not to legalize abortion up to 18 weeks after fertilization—with exceptions thereafter for cases of rape, incest, or life-threatening pregnancy anomalies. They garnered significantly more signatures than is needed to get the issue on the ballot. But the petition was denied on a paperwork technicality, which a slim majority of Arkansas justices construed as a legitimate reason to deny the ballot measure entirely.
I was disappointed. But not surprised.
But my disappointment ratcheted up to the level of disgust when the article revealed Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ post on Xformerlyknownastwitter, “Proud I helped build the first conservative Supreme Court majority in the history of Arkansas and today that court upheld the rule of law, and with it, the right to life.”
Regardless of how Sanders personally feels about abortion, it’s really difficult to stomach an elected official who gloats.
She maligns her own constituents—referring to abortion rights activists as “immoral and incompetent.” And clearly doesn’t give a fig about their efforts to engage in the democratic process. Sanders toots her own horn at their expense. A really bad look for a governor.
I suspect the truth is she’s afraid to let this scenario play out in an open election. Other states have put the issue on the ballot thereby protecting abortion rights— California, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan and Ohio.
And some states are primed to let the people decide in the election this fall— Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New York and South Dakota.
But here in Arkansas, the obvious will of the people is thwarted with a technicality, because the queen and her court fear the outcome of a fair election would render them helpless against the mighty roar of her subjects.
When I was a young girl, my father instilled in me a reverence for our democracy, including high honor for the judicial system. I remember him talking about how supreme court justices grew into the job—even those who were a little rough around the edges at first—because it wasn’t about politics. It was about interpreting the law. And the weight of the nation rested on their shoulders. Being a Supreme Court Justice was serious business.
Whether or not the current supreme court justices, both national and state, are still thusly affected by the weight of the job is unclear to me. Some seem to regard the responsibility as I was taught they ought to. But my viewpoint is neither here nor there. I don’t have any say in who gets nominated to be a supreme court justice—except by voting for the officials who do the nominating.
But I do think it takes a lot of gall for a governor to admit to her constituents that she is, in fact, stacking the court. On purpose. With obvious intent to thwart the democratic process.
Justice Karen R. Baker, one of the dissenting justices in the recent Arkansas case, wrote, “The majority has succeeded in its efforts to change the law in order to deprive the voters of the opportunity to vote on this issue.”
Maybe Baker is one of those justices my father was talking about.
And maybe Sanders is an empress in new clothing, whose court, mindful of their jobs, tell her only what she wants to hear.