Video: Swalwell Shows He Has No Idea What He's Talking About When It Comes to SCOTUS


Few have confused Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) with being an esteemed Constitutional scholar.

But on Thursday, the California Democrat appeared confused about what the Supreme Court does.

During a House hearing, Swalwell railed against the Supreme Court’s decision in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization which overturned Roe v. Wade.

“This law, from the Supreme Court, Dobbs, and the laws that will follow in Texas, in Georgia, and other states will bring us government mandated pregnancies for 10-year-olds, fourth graders, little girls,” Swalwell said.

He went on, “And to deflect from that, they choose to bully and beat up transgender individuals. Who represent fewer than 1% of Americans. And they try and deflect that because they don’t want anyone in America to realize that they don’t just want to wage a war on women.”

Auburn Coaches Draw Legal Fire from Powerful Atheist Group Over Spontaneous Mass Baptism

Watch the video below:

Did you catch it?

Swalwell referred to the Dobbs decision as a “law.”

It is not a law. The Supreme Court does not pass laws. Congress and state legislatures do.

All this ruling did was state that the states get to choose whether or not to restrict abortions. That ruling in and of itself does not limit abortions.

If voters in states want to expand access to abortion or limit it, they have more power than over the past 50 years to advance their preferred policy. They can vote for pro-choice or pro-life politicians on the state level with the hopes of influencing abortion laws.

Now, some may say about Swalwell’s comments, “That’s a small mistake. What does it matter?”

Well, for the people who tend to decry alleged misinformation from conservative media, there has been a lot of misleading coverage about the decision and what the Supreme Court actually did.

Biden Refers to Wrapper LL Cool J as 'Boy' to Congressional Black Caucus

Last month, The New York Times published a report that implied the court banned abortion — it did not.

It’s one thing to criticize the court and rail against its decisions.

But its detractors should at least know what they’re talking about and use the right terms. Otherwise, they sound like un-serious people.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Comment Down Below