Just when you think the media’s smear campaign against conservative Supreme Court justices can’t get any more despicable, they find a way to prove you wrong.
On Wednesday, Rolling Stone magazine’s Andrew Perez published a hit piece against Justice Amy Coney Barrett that amounts to nothing more than a dud for Democrats’ war on SCOTUS. The “scandal,” according to the outlet, is that Barrett’s husband is representing Fox Corporation — Fox News’ parent company — in an ongoing defamation case involving one of its local stations.
“The defamation case was filed by Lavell Redmond, an Illinois man who was convicted of aggravated sexual assault as a minor and served 24 years in prison,” the report reads. “Redmond was hired as a code enforcement officer by the mayor of Dolton in 2021, the original complaint says. He is suing Fox over a series of reports that scandalized his hiring — the first of which claimed he had been hired for ‘a job in which he goes into Dolton homes and businesses to inspect them.’”
If you’re wondering what the story’s damning bombshell is, you’re not alone. Not even Perez could identify an ethics violation or act of illegality committed by Barrett or her husband arising from the case. Not only is the matter not pending before SCOTUS, but the high court isn’t even presiding over a case in which Fox Corp. is a party.
The revelation is so unnewsworthy that Perez was left to describe obvious truths, such as how Fox News “regularly covers matters at the Supreme Court and will surely continue to do so as the high court nears the end of its term.” He also ominously warned readers about SCOTUS’s plans to issue rulings on several “controversial topics” this year, including those related to “abortion, guns, public corruption, and whether Donald Trump is entitled to immunity for life for acts he committed as president.”
Because as we all know, the Supreme Court issuing decisions on matters of public importance has never occurred before in American history.
As pathetic as it is, Rolling Stone’s smear against Barrett is not an anomaly. Rather, it’s the latest in a string of pseudo-events manufactured by Democrats and their media allies to delegitimize the Supreme Court. Perez gave away the game plan when he cited “complaints” from anonymous “ethics experts” who are allegedly concerned that “[j]ustices are not required to disclose their spouses’ clients,” and that because of this, “the public has no way to track who is paying money directly to their families.”
Of course, these so-called “experts” are almost assuredly Democrats and media apparatchiks who have spent the past several years attempting to undermine the Supreme Court.
From Justices Clarence Thomas to Neil Gorsuch, the wave of dishonest Democrat hit pieces designed to cast a cloud of impropriety over the court’s Republican-nominated members has been nonstop. The latest batch has come from The New York Times, which invented a controversy out of thin air by claiming flags flown by Justice Samuel Alito’s wife at their East Coast residence are tied to the “Stop the Steal” crowd and Jan. 6, 2021, demonstrations at the U.S. Capitol.
Despite there being zero evidence to support such an assertion or claims of wrongdoing by Alito, Democrats have been running around like chickens with their heads cut off demanding the Republican appointee recuse himself from cases related to their 2024 campaign strategy of weaponizing the justice system against Donald Trump and his supporters. Radical leftists such as Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., have adopted the phony stories to push baseless legal theories, such as the theory that Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Justice Department can force Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves from J6-related cases before the court.
At the end of the day, Democrats’ motivation for undermining the Supreme Court is rooted in one thing: power.
The Supreme Court is the only major institution left in America that the Democrat Party doesn’t control. And if the left can’t control something, it will do its darndest to vilify and destroy it at all costs.
