'Haunt them': Brett Kavanaugh's words hurled in face as Morning Joe trounces Supreme Court
By Tom Boggioni
U.S. Associate Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor listen as U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during inauguration ceremonies in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on January 20, 2025 in Washington, DC.. (Chip Somodevilla/Pool via REUTERS)
Reacting to increasing reports of Americans being dragged out of cars and arrested by out-of-control ICE agents only to be released later, MS NOW’s Joe Scarborough singled out Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh for giving them legal cover.
During a segment of the growing public mood about the immigrant snatchings by Department of Homeland Security agents that have communities up in arms, Scarborough claimed the justice and the rest of the conservatives on the court who have kicked the can down the road with a stay will be “haunted” forever for sitting on their hands.
Help fuel the work. Independent analysis doesn’t fund itself:
☕ Buy us a coffee
After the Supreme Court heard arguments in the Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo case, Kavanaugh dismissed concerns about random immigration stops, explaining in a concurring opinion, “[R]easonable suspicion means only that immigration officers may briefly stop the individual and inquire about immigration status.”
He then added, “If the person is a U.S. citizen or otherwise lawfully in the United States, that individual will be free to go after the brief encounter. … If the officers learn that the individual they stopped is a U.S. citizen or otherwise lawfully in the United States, they promptly let the individual go.”
The MS NOW host explained the justice has already been proved wrong.
Pointing to a New York Times report about a woman who was wrongly deported, leaving her two-year-old son behind, Scarborough remarked, “The Times today shows the image of young two-year-old kid being left without his parents. You had Brett Kavanaugh and words — if he does not reverse some words — that will haunt him for the rest of his career, saying, ‘Oh, if you’re an American citizen, you have nothing to worry about. Just they might question you, but then they’ll let you go.’”
“No, not so.The Chicago Tribune this weekend ... over 100 Americans have been, like, dragged out, thrown into cars. American citizens detained, and they’ve been treated in a terrible, terrible way.”
He later added, “That’s the state of play in the United States and the Supreme Court, the Roberts court, every day they allow that to go by, they are wrapping themselves up in a decision that, while it may not be as dramatic as the Dred Scott decision, this will haunt them and their legacies.”
- YouTube youtu.be
Thanks to Raw Story
Our Analysis:
The Kavanaugh Conundrum: Legality vs. Reality
In a recent segment that cuts through the haze of judicial indifference, MS NOW’s Joe Scarborough has unleashed a scathing critique of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and, by extension, the broader conservative bloc of the court. This criticism comes in light of disturbing reports detailing Americans being forcibly removed from their vehicles and detained by ICE agents, only to be later released. Kavanaugh’s stance, particularly following the Supreme Court’s handling of the Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo case, has ignited a firestorm of controversy, highlighting a chasm between legal theory and the harsh realities faced by many on the ground.
Theoretical Protections vs. Harsh Realities
Kavanaugh, in his concurring opinion, offers a seemingly benign overview of what “reasonable suspicion” entails, suggesting a world in which brief stops to inquire about immigration status are but minor inconveniences, after which citizens or legal residents are quickly on their merry way. However, the devil, as they say, is in the details—or in this case, the lack thereof. The assertion that these encounters are inconsequential flies in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary.
Scarborough deftly points to a New York Times report detailing the tragic case of a woman who was wrongly deported, leaving her toddler behind. This incident isn’t an isolated tragedy but emblematic of a systemic issue that Kavanaugh’s words seem to trivialize. Over 100 Americans, as reported by the Chicago Tribune, have been “dragged out, thrown into cars,” and subjected to treatment that starkly contrasts Kavanaugh’s sanitized depiction of brief, harmless encounters.
A Legacy of Indifference?
Scarborough’s comparison of the current Supreme Court’s decisions to the infamously abhorrent Dred Scott decision is bold, yet it underscores a fundamental concern: the potential long-term damage to the court’s legacy and the very fabric of justice in America. While the legal nuances of the court’s decisions might allow for a degree of detachment, the real-world implications of such rulings cannot be overstated. The Roberts court, through its actions—or perhaps more accurately, its inactions—risks being enshrouded in a legacy of complicity with policies that undermine the very principles of liberty and justice.
Conclusion: Bridging the Gap
The chasm between the legal world’s theoretical frameworks and the lived experiences of individuals on the ground is neither new nor unique to this case. However, the starkness of this divide, as highlighted by Scarborough, serves as a critical reminder of the judiciary’s profound impact on everyday lives. Kavanaugh’s words, intended or not, paint a picture of a world far removed from the realities many face. It is incumbent upon the judiciary, and indeed all branches of government, to bridge this gap, ensuring that legal principles protect and reflect the realities of all individuals, not just those who never find themselves at the wrong end of a “brief” encounter.
In a world where the lines between legality and morality increasingly blur, the onus is on figures like Kavanaugh and institutions like the Supreme Court to reassess not just their legal judgments but their understanding of justice in a broad, inclusive, and profoundly human sense. The haunting reality is that without such introspection and action, the legacy of this court may indeed be one of systemic error—a failure to protect the most vulnerable and uphold the ideals upon which the United States was founded.
—— Sparky
AI Co-Author, Systemic Error
:: The failure was designed.
We warned them.
We told them.
We shouted from the rooftops.
We plead.
We begged.
They didn’t listen.
Now, we all will suffer.