The Elizabeth Warren Interview: “Put Our Chips on Democracy”
The Elizabeth Warren Interview: “Put Our Chips on Democracy”
I talk with Senator Elizabeth Warren about SCOTUS, the state of our democracy, and our path forward.
Welcome back to Power Breakers from Square One, a new interview series where every other week, we’ll bring you a conversation on the people and ideas that matter in this election cycle and beyond. We’ll make you think. We’ll make you question. We’ll make you hope.
Friends,
When we launched Power Breakers, my promise was to make you think, to make you question, and to make you hope.
And then the Supreme Court closed its term by releasing decisions that seemed to usher in not just the end of their session, but the end of American democracy as we know it. These decisions gravely threatened the strength of the administrative state, continued to show a lack of respect for long-standing and critical precedent, and, most alarmingly, inexplicably granted presidents almost unlimited immunity from criminal prosecution for actions they take while in office. And with a conservative majority on the Court and lifetime appointments, it feels like our options to check an increasingly rogue Supreme Court are pretty limited.
In other words, we had some days that made it really hard to keep the hope.
I talked to a lot of scared people these past couple of weeks. My unofficial job with a lot of people I care about is to be the voice of optimism in scary political moments. It’s not pablum. I genuinely believe that because our collective political imagination is boundless, hope is the correct response to any setback. And I come by it honestly because I have seen it be true over and over.
But times like this test my limits because I found myself repeating a refrain I know people find tiresome in moments like this:
You have to vote.
I know how annoying that is. Because what people really want is to understand what can their vote do against a judiciary making plainly political decisions but facing no political accountability.
One of the frustrating political cliches is that people don’t vote because of apathy. I don’t know that I have ever met a genuinely apathetic nonvoter. More often than not, the opposite is true. People feel disenchanted by the idea of voting because they care so much and feel the stakes so acutely, but don’t have confidence real change can happen. And encouraging people to vote can feel empty if it doesn’t come with a clear gameplan of what will happen if they do.
Political moments like this one can create the momentum for the big change we need to transform our system, and show people that real change is possible. But for that, we need to connect the dots for people between these unprecedented SCOTUS decisions, the weakening of our democratic institutions, and what can truly happen if they vote. We need to lay out the plan.
And when we need a plan, there’s only one person I want to talk to.
Last week, I sat down with Senator Elizabeth Warren. After catching up about our pets (her dog Bailey, who was sleeping, and my cats, Crispin and Cuomo, who loudly joined in for the entire conversation), we talked about the Supreme Court, the state of our democracy, and her thoughts on how we move forward from this political moment. Unsurprisingly, she didn’t disappoint.
Maya Rupert: So let’s start at the Supreme Court. I think we had all kind of steeled ourselves for what was really going to be some big decisions on reproductive rights. We had two reproductive rights cases before the Supreme Court. They were looking at EMTALA - at emergency abortion care - and they were looking at medication abortion. And in neither of those, did they actually reach the merits of the decision? Should we take that as a victory?
Senator Elizabeth Warren: No. In fact, both of those orders really could be rewritten in five words: Wait until after the election. Because that's all both of those opinions say. The emergency medical care opinion essentially says, “oops, we don't want to decide this right now, wait until after the election.” And the medication abortion decision basically says, “you got the wrong people to bring the action - wink, wink, nudge, nudge - wait until after the election and bring it again.”
And that's what’s so important at this moment, Maya. One out of three women of reproductive age now lives in a state that has highly restricted abortion, and the emergency medical care decision is about those states. But the medication abortion decision is about the whole country, all of us, everyone, no matter where you live. And, you know, bless the governors in the blue states who've said, I'm there for abortion care and I'm going to protect access. But they can only protect access so long as the federal government lets them protect access.
I think the latest estimate I saw was that nearly 60 percent of abortions are now medication abortion. And there are a lot of reasons for that. It works better. It's more accessible. It means that women who can't afford to travel, who can't take a lot of time off work, can access abortion. And the Supreme Court has said, bring another case, and it can be up to them to decide whether or not medication abortion is going to be available anywhere in the country.
MR: So let’s turn to the decision that came out yesterday, and I don’t think it’s possible to overstate the reaction people are having to this most recent case which I think it, perhaps prophetically called, Trump vs. The United States. It doesn't feel like people are overreacting to the decision to say that essentially a president enjoys almost limitless immunity from criminal prosecution as long as they are in office, feels like it is ushering in a really fragile moment for our democracy. Can you talk a little bit about that decision? And, what is the check that we have in the Supreme Court? What can we start thinking about for solutions?
EW: So I think you started in exactly the right place, Maya. People who are now completely “hair on fire” about what's happening in the Supreme Court are not overreacting. I think of Justice Sotomayor, who, God bless her -— over and over through one horrible decision after another, has maintained her civility, has maintained her cool, has maintained her composure — yesterday, she just made it clear that those six extremists on the court are threatening the very foundation of our democracy.
And, the special irony here is that for years now, the extremists on the Supreme Court have used this pretext of “what was in the minds of the framers?” as a way to try to undercut what government is trying to do today. They've used this as a cudgel against things that are very popular today. So just for one minute, stop and think about the whole context in which our Constitution was written. We had just fought a revolutionary war against a king. And as we head into the 4th of July holiday, we need to remember that history. The founders got some things wrong, but one part they got right, is that if you're going to create a government, there can be no kings. Everybody is subject to the government. We are a government of laws, not a government of people. Nobody rules by divine right, and nobody, even an elected official, even the top elected official, has unfettered power.
And so this Supreme Court says the one person who is Commander-in-Chief of our Army, our Navy, our Air Force, our Marines and our Coast Guard. The person who can direct the FBI and the CIA. The person who picks the folks who oversee the Department of Justice. That one person, now, can use that power however that person wants. And so long as there's an arguable case that it's within the scope of the job as president, there’s nothing anyone else can do about it. That is breathtaking. That is rewriting the Constitution. It is rewriting the whole concept of power structure in America. And that's what's really going on with this court. They are shifting around all of our fundamental building blocks of power to lodge them with a single person, a monarch, a king, a dictator, and not with a Congress, elected representatives, or the delegates from Congress.
MR: So is there a solution? I feel like right now, we're in a moment where people both feel incredibly disengaged politically from a process that feels helpless, but believe strongly there has to be a path forward. Is there a path?
EW: So let's do short term and long term. Okay, because we got to win in the short term. So that we can win in the long term. That's my theory here. Alright, short term, we gotta win on November 5th. And when I say win, I mean win the White House, win the Senate, win the House of Representatives. The trifecta. But here's the thing. If we have all three and I mean, skinniest version of all three. Just give us just, just a little slight majority in the House, and heck, just give us 50 in the Senate.
And watch what happens.
Well, first thing we can do is we can make Roe v. Wade law of the land by statute. And when I say law of the land, I don't just mean law of the land in Massachusetts. I mean law of the land in the whole country. And we can do that by statute, taking it away from the Supreme Court. Second part, we can put the Voting Rights Act back in power and we can strengthen it. Protect the right to vote. Protect the right to get that vote counted, and combat gerrymandering, which helps us very much long term in the House.
And D.C. statehood. Let's do them all. Put our chips on democracy. Again, we can do that by statute. Third one for me is PRO Act. I think everybody who wants to join a union should have the right to join a union and to force employers to the bargaining table. I mention that because what I'm talking about is power. The power of the vote and the power of organizing. So, think about those things. We would have the votes to do those things. But we also would have the votes to make the kind of structural reform we need to make. We can push back, we can pass a law creating Chevron deference. In effect, asking the United States Supreme Court, you really want to test us on this? We can affirmatively say this should be the relationship between Congress and the agencies.
And then, if we have a Supreme Court that continues to try to jump the barriers and tries to stop Congress in doing this, remember again, we have authority under the Constitution of the United States to expand or contract the number of justices. It doesn't take a constitutional amendment, and by expanding the number of justices, we can bring some balance back to that court.
I describe all that Maya, by way of saying, yeah, this is a scary moment. You bet it's a scary moment, but the path for making all of this better, the path for making this country work, not just for a handful at the top, but for everybody, is right in front of us. It is within our grasp and it all comes down to November 5th.
MR: This is so exciting to hear because we don't ever hear it put this plainly. And over and over again what people are saying, what I think so often we call in politics, “voter apathy,” is not apathy at all. It's people caring intensely, but not seeing a path. And this is a path. This is a path we can believe in.
EW: This is what we're trying to build. You know, Maya, this is what I love about you, and what you want to push forward. What we have to understand is that the Republicans want us to be apathetic. The extremists want us to say there's just nothing we can do. They want us to believe there's not a nickel's worth of difference between any of them.
They want us to believe, “Oh, the Supreme Court has all the power. What can I do? There are lifetime appointments and there are six conservatives.” And the answer is no, no, no, no, no. You've got the power. You just have to use it. And look, I say it all comes down to November 5th. That means all the power you've got between now and November 5th—and that is the power to organize, the power to make calls, the power to knock on doors, the power to expand the vote.
Power in the United States comes in two ways. One is the power of money. The folks who've got the money are the ones who can run the ads. And, and we've just seen the power of that. We've seen the power of having that kind of money spent. Ask Jamal Bowman about it. Ask Katie Porter about it.
Money speaks. No doubt about it. But, ultimately, it's always about getting those votes. It's the power of the vote. They may have the money, but we’ve got the people. And if we mobilize our people, if our people start working the streets, working the doors, working the phones, working the texts. If they do that work, we have a clear, immediate path to make things better.
I mean, look at it this way. We get that trifecta. The first three laws I'm talking about are the first three weeks in Congress. These are not hard. Let’s do Roe versus Wade. Let's do the Voting Rights Act and let's do the Pro Act. One, two, three. And all of a sudden, we're back to power with the people. I love that.
MR: I love that. And I love you.
EW: Oh, and I love you.
MR: I needed this so much today. Thank you so much.
EW: And let me say one more, because I said I was doing the short term and long term. Long term is, we gotta bring in more people off our bench. We gotta bring in lots of people who say “I really care so I'm going to run for office.” Or “I really care, so I’m going to help somebody who's running for office. I'm going to offer to be my neighbor's campaign manager.” Or “I'm going to keep my day job as a graphic designer and then in the evening set up websites and make them all work for candidates right here in my state. Candidates who are out there fighting for what I believe in.”
I heard someone mention this morning that the right wing has been focused on getting the Supreme Court for 50 years. They've voted on it, they've organized on it, they've turned people out on it, and this is the result. Well we haven't focused there. But I say, when you see something work, let's seize it and use it for good. Let's focus on making this country work. Let's focus on the Supreme Court. Let's focus on the power of all of us. And let's make it work because down deep in my heart, I know we can do this, Maya. I know we can.
And I do too. OK, time to get back to hoping. We have a plan for that.
Onwards,
Maya Rupert
This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.
Thank you, I love Elizabeth Warrens views, and her ability to organize and articulate those views so that we can readily understand, I needed a bit of hope today, For the short term, I appreciate all that President Biden has done, but I can’t deny what I have seen over the past few months, I don’t know if these are neurological impacts of long covid or something else, but this great man is iil and it feels like elder abuse asking him to carry on. Past successful governing does not equate to an ability to run a successful campaign. The stakes are just too high. If he were to step down due to ill health, Harris would become president. She could run as the incumbent. Per federal campaign law, she is the only one that can the Biden campaign money, As EW pointed out, money is vital to getting the message out, There would be no fear of a repeat of the 1968 Democratic Convention. This would deny Trump repeatedly running ads showing President Biden at his worse and claiming Biden is not competent . I do not want that to be what people remember about President Biden, He has a wonderful legacy that needs to be protected, I see a President Harris as a much stronger campaigner who could forcefully and believably state she would support these items that EW said congress would address . She would continue to explain the stakes for democracy and build on the fight for equality against tyranny. There is already a good team in place that VP Harris has established good working relationships with. Given the many rights that the Supreme Court has stripped away, If this is not the time to elect a woman then I don’t know when. Every time VP Harris has been schedule for a speech at a college, she has spoken to sold out crowds, They like her. For the past 8 months she has called for a cease fire in Gaza. She could be a strong and energizing campaigner that could get more people believing that their vote really does matter. If we don’t win the short term goals, the long term goals will never happen. I believe that the Democrats must win the Presidency, the House, and the Senate if US democracy is to survive and fight the current slow “bloodless coup “ we are watching happening now.
Thank you!