Supreme Court Justice Thinks That Criticism Of The Court Constitutes "Intimidation"

From The National Review via Yahoo! News - 

Alito Defends Supreme Court’s Texas Heartbeat Ruling in Defiant Speech

Justice Samuel Alito rebutted Thursday what he called “unfair and damaging attacks” on the Supreme Court over its emergency adjudication of politically-charged cases, such as the Texas heartbeat law, which recently went into effect after the bench declined to block it.

Responding to criticisms that the conservative-dominated court has been strategically rushing into hasty decisions to advance a secret political agenda, Alito objected to the media’s use of the term “shadow docket” as a misnomer, and claimed such an accusation erodes the legitimacy of the federal judiciary.

From The Guardian (UK) -

Alito hits out at ‘intimidation’ in defence of supreme court’s Texas abortion ruling

[snip]

“The catchy and sinister term ‘shadow docket’ has been used to portray the court as having been captured by a dangerous cabal that resorts to sneaky and improper methods to get its ways,” Alito said at Notre Dame, referring to increasingly common emergency applications that come before the justices outside regular sessions.

“This portrayal feeds unprecedented efforts to intimidate the court or damage it as an independent institution. There was nothing new or shadowy about the procedures we followed in those cases. It’s hard to see how we can handle most emergency matters any differently.”

In many ways, he's echoing a fellow justice, Amy Coney Barrett.  From the Louisville Courier-Journal - 

Justice Amy Coney Barrett argues US Supreme Court isn't 'a bunch of partisan hacks'

In the wake of a controversial decision on abortion rights, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett told a crowd of more than 100 here that she doesn't believe the highest court in the land is politically driven.

“My goal today is to convince you that this court is not comprised of a bunch of partisan hacks,” she told the guests at a Sunday celebration of the 30th anniversary of the opening of the McConnell Center at the University of Louisville.

Maybe Alito would have more credibility if he wasn't such a snowflake who ignored the stacking of the federal judiciary (not just the Supreme Court) with legally unqualified but ideologically pure Trumpkins.

And maybe Barrett would have more credibility is she didn't give her speech at an event named after the person who used politics to grease/facilitate her appointment to the USSC.