GWU law professor Jonathan Turley criticized Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson for writing a “disgraceful” opinion attacking her colleague Justice Clarence Thomas. “I think that the most disgraceful aspect of the Jackson opinion was the suggestion that Justice Thomas was reintroducing Dred Scott into the nation,” Turley told FOX News host Charlie Hurt. “This is just the latest scurrilous attack on Justice Thomas. You know, this is an individual who, at our 250th anniversary, should be the source of great celebration.”

CHARLIE HURT, FOX NEWS HOST: Neither party is satisfied with last week’s decisions, but it’s a reminder, the Supreme Court was never created to serve a political party. It’s meant to uphold the Constitution, and that’s exactly what it’s doing. FOX News contributor, constitutional law attorney, and George Washington law professor Jonathan Turley joins us now. So great to see you, professor. You know, speaking of irony, there’s no greater irony, if you ask me, than for the past several years we’ve been lectured about Black Lives Matter and only Black Lives Matter, and yet you have the same people who took the 14th Amendment, which was designed to protect, give dignity, and to give rights to African Americans who were brought to this country against their will and forced into servitude. You’ve got Ketanji Brown Jackson taking the 14th Amendment and saying, no, it’s not about black lives. It’s about anybody’s lives that matter, that can help the Democrat Party. JONATHAN TURLEY, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Well, Charlie, I think that the most disgraceful aspect of the Jackson opinion was the suggestion that Justice Thomas was reintroducing Dred Scott into the nation. This is just the latest scurrilous attack on Justice Thomas. You know, this is an individual who, at our 250th anniversary, should be the source of great celebration. This is someone who was born in a family that had a dirt floor in their home, had no plumbing, who went through a Catholic school that taught him how to read, and ultimately became one of the longest-standing justices in the history of the court, and yet she would say this about him. It’s disgraceful, and it’s reminiscent of when the Smithsonian omitted him from great African Americans in history. But what you brought out, I think, quite well, Charlie, is the hypocrisy of many on the left. These are people who just recited, about two days ago, how we have to fight for our institutions when there’s this mantra to destroy one of the most critical institutions in our constitutional system. The question is, are we going to, on this anniversary, fight for the Supreme Court? This next election, both the midterm and also in 2028, is going to be about the Supreme Court and whether we protect it as an institution. This is a court that has brought us stability for 250 years. It has served its function. It still is. HURT: And I think it’s kind of interesting. For the past 20, 25 years, Republicans have very successfully run against, run political campaigns from president to senate, even some house races, very successfully running against the concept of judicial activism. And it was President Trump who was the most successful at ridding the Supreme Court of a majority that was governed by political, that kind of political overreach by the judicial branch. TURLEY: That’s right. In fact, I think the Supreme Court may prove to be the most lasting legacy of Donald Trump. And I know he’s been frustrated with some of his nominees, but his three nominees are extraordinary. All three of them are brilliant jurists. Yes, they disagree with him at times. Mostly they vote in favor of conservative values because they’re conservative jurists. But he said that he wanted to appoint thoughtful, independent, principled justices. Well, he got them. And they have improved this court immeasurably. HURT: And no matter how much we might disagree with some of the outcomes, it does seem like some people on the right are falling for this PSYOP of attacking, in particular, Amy Coney Barrett. They’re falling for this Democrat PSYOP, which is to, as you point out, completely destroy the Supreme Court with this packing business that turns the Supreme Court into some blind panel of 30 people. And whoa, you think that’s not going to wind up a left-wing hatchet job? TURLEY: No, there’s a very bright line for this election on where you stand with regard to the Supreme Court. If we want another 250th year to follow this one, we have to support this institution now. Benjamin Franklin said this is our republic to keep, and we have to keep it.

RealClearPolitics Videos