By SUZANNE DOWNING, EDITOR

The Alaska Supreme Court has left no doubt that it is an activist court. It has weighed in on the events that unfolded subsequent to the killing of George Floyd, a Minneapolis man who died at the hands of police, and whose death has become a rallying cry against the United States in general.

After days of violent riots around the world (as well as peaceful protests in Alaska), after many innocent people were curb-stomped by rioters across the country, after law enforcement officers were beaten and killed in cold blood, the Alaska Supreme Court posted a letter of sympathy for the insurrection that could have been written by the Alaska ACLU.

“As we watch events unfolding in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd, we are saddened to see again that the ideals on which our society is founded are far from the reality of many people’s lives. We recognize that as a court system we must commit ourselves to making these ideals real by once again dedicating our efforts to ensuring that we provide an accessible and impartial forum for the just resolution of all cases,” the judges wrote.

Read that again. It was not the death of George Floyd, but the events that unfolded after his death that have prompted the judges to clutch at their pearls in a virtue-signaling letter that sends a message all the way through the Alaska court system, to lower court judges, workers in the judiciary, prosecutors, and defense attorneys.

Here’s what that Supreme Court is signaling: Since African-Americans, Alaska Natives, and other people of color “are not treated with the same dignity and respect as white members of our communities,” the courts “must do more to change this reality.”

What does that mean, in practical terms? Not arrest criminals? Not prosecute drug dealers or human traffickers? Allow looters to destroy businesses? How do the black-robed judges propose to change the hearts of the society they live in, or is it even their job?

Critics say that the job of the Third Branch of government is to uphold the law, to rule impartially, and to deliver justice.

But the Supreme Court chose last week to undergo a a very public Maoist Struggle Session in writing for all to see, to examine their own hearts and personal histories for bad things, such as their role in societal inequities, and to say that society needs to be better than it is. The letter was very nearly an apology for their white privilege.

The judges say that they “must work with our neighbors to help heal the raw wounds of racism and history that have been so painfully laid bare. It is only by working together that we can hope to move beyond the pain that is so evident today.”

Healing the raw wounds in society has now become their job?

Most people recognize that no matter the criminality of George Floyd, his death was an outrage. But the national riots that followed also have markers that the passions of a pent-up, unemployed public was being manipulated by Antifa, a tentacle organization that has probably been infiltrated by bad actors and possibly even foreign agents to create chaos and provoke police response across the country. There is plenty of video evidence that provocateurs were at work across the country to turn a valid protest into breaking and entering, looting, pillaging, murder, and hate crimes against whites.

The justices didn’t need to wade in on this. Chief Justice Bolger should have used better judgment.

Nowhere in the letter did the justices say that victims of crime deserve justice.

Nowhere in the letter did the justices say that the burning of St. John’s Church in Washington, D.C. violated the rights of Americans to exercise their First Amendment freedom of religion.

Nowhere did the justices acknowledge that the storming of the White House last week was an illegal attempt to overthrow the government of the United States.

Nowhere did they express thanks for our law enforcement officers who leave their homes each morning, hoping they will live through the day to return home.

In fact, the judges simply wrung their hands and waffled on what should be done about the imperfect world we all live in.

The June 8 letter was about virtue signaling, letting protesters know that, if they are arrested for breaking a window during a protest, the court system will take it easy on them for the sake of social justice.

The justices cannot presume that their societal pronouncement lands in the public arena without context. Days of rage and lawlessness had preceded their decision to release this letter of white judicial culpability.

Chief Justice Joel Bolger has stepped into the political arena before. His last publicly posted letter was posted in 2019, warning Gov. Mike Dunleavy to not cut the court’s budget and advising that the courts need to remain independent. In so many words, Bolger said the court was under political pressure. He went before the Alaska Federation of Natives and asked for their help to protect the court from administrative budget cuts.

This is the same court that decided the governor could face a recall election this year. And the same Supreme Court Chief Justice who only recused himself from that decision-making panel after Must Read Alaska pressured him to do so.

[Read: Refuse to recuse]

[Read: Under pressure, Supreme Court Chief Justice recuses]

The duty of the court is not to jump in and pronounce society as unfair. The duty of the court is to make it fair each and every day as it adjudicates questions of crime and matters of civil disagreement.

But Alaska’s Supreme Court has jumped feet first into the Days of Rage drama, as Antifa and Black Lives Matter conspired in an actual attempt to overthrow the government.

The Alaska Supreme Court justices have shown their judicial activism card and we have seen it. Perhaps the very best thing they can do now is to simply resign, since their white privilege cannot be redeemed, even if they took a knee.

By MATT STEELE

Benedict Arnold was a general officer in the Continental Army best known for his treasonous betrayal of George Washington and the American Revolution.

In 1780, he defected from the Continental Army to the British, handing West Point to them and eventually fighting against the very Americans he previously commanded.

Today, his name is synonymous with treason and has become a byword. But why did he do this?

Pride, certainly, and more than just a touch of narcissism. 

Arnold often complained he was unfairly passed over for promotion. He also lived a lavish lifestyle, spending official money to feed his desires, and he was accused of corruption and malfeasance. Essentially, Arnold was on “Team Arnold,” and anyone with the temerity to stand in his way be damned.

Betrayal against a cause almost always comes down to pride. Somehow, the betrayer knows better, thinks his or her opinion is worth more, or he’s simply more valuable than the unwashed rubes he or she used to stand with.

Add a little narcissism and the path gets even more dangerous. Not satisfied by a simple turn-coat operation, a narcissist will actively destroy those they betray. To stand against a narcissist is to bring his wrath. 

In the Alaska Republican Party, we have several Benedict Arnolds. 

State Rep. David Eastman

In the Valley, Representative David Eastman is a conservative who has actively recruited and is coaching people to run against his fellow Valley conservatives. In fact, one of the candidates he is supporting is a member of another party.

Why is he doing this? Only God knows the man’s heart, but we do know this self-proclaimed abortion abolitionist actually withheld support, effectively acting in agreement with Planned Parenthood’s wishes, on every House bill that would shackle abortion.

Especially noteworthy is the “Heartbeat Bill.” It had 19 supporters and only needed 20 to go to a vote. Eastman could have been the 20^th name, but he didn’t do it.

The stated reason?  It wasn’t a total ban.

This short-sighted tactic is akin to General Eisenhower voting down the Normandy invasion because it didn’t land at Hitler’s front door in Berlin. Eastman could have voted to save five babies’ lives today, and another 10 tomorrow, but he laid them at the altar of his own ego on the premise of an all-or-nothing ideal.

He has also withheld support to place conservatives in various positions in the House, all in the name of “Make Eastman the Center of Attention Again.”

When the tough bills go forward and are in need of support, he’s nowhere to be seen. When it’s time to vote on a conservative piece of legislation, he votes like a pigeon trained to peck the red button – always “no.”

Some Democrats actually vote more conservatively than Eastman.

He has also deliberately obstructed other business on the floor, attacked fellow conservatives on social media, and has started a shadow campaign against the rest of the Valley delegation.

Eastman’s strategy is effectively draining Valley resources that could otherwise go to help conservative candidates in Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Kenai. His antics are aiding the other side and helping create a Sen. Natasha von Imhoff Juneau Show sequel. He is no ally to conservative values.

State Sen. Cathy Giessel

Perhaps no other politician in Juneau deserves more ire than Sen. Cathy Giessel.  Not satisfied to debate, vote, and disagree, she subjugates other voting districts into vassal states.

Few things could be more disagreeable to our founding fathers than how Giessel has treated other duly-elected representatives, particularly the Valley delegation.

In her mind, the Valley conservative is an obstacle — an unwelcome speed bump on her freeway to power. 

To the Valley voter, her message should be clear.  Never you mind her broken promises to preserve the PFD. Never mind her lawless gathering in Juneau when the Governor called a legally binding session in Wasilla.  And you serfs need not worry about how she vindictively flogged your Valley representation and removed your influence from every aspect of lawmaking simply because they represented your wishes. Your ideas and ideals are irrelevant.

To her, the Valley shall submit or suffer the consequences.

She has taken Alaska state politics and given it a Chicago makeover, with just a touch of feudalism.

State Rep. Gary Knopp

Benedict Arnold handed the keys for West Point to the British, and Rep. Gary Knopp handed the keys for Juneau to the Democrats.

Why? Knopp wanted to be Rules Committee chair, where he could effectively block anything the governor does.

Knopp advocated for and got a bipartisan majority caucus using the time-honored parliamentary tactic of ‘temper tantrum’.  If you remember, he held up the Legislature by preventing caucus formation and the resulting agenda votes.  Committees couldn’t stand up, and work couldn’t start.  Alaskan’s were paying millions in perdiem and salaries just watching Knopp whine and hold his breath for weeks. Not a great representation of the good folks on the Kenai Peninsula, to be sure.

The results are disheartening. While republicans hold the majority of the seats in the House, the agenda is now run by a Democrat because of Knopp (although he was spurred by Rep. Eastman’s constantly disruptive antics).

Alaska is in a war for its fiscal survival, but Knopp’s tantrum in early 2019 virtually guaranteed any cuts made by the duly elected Governor would not stay in place.

Needless to say, this betrayal of his constituents (among others) resulted in District 30 republicans actively recruiting his replacement.  

Maybe they’ll erect a riderless horse statue in Knopp’s honor, just like Arnold’s statue (the boot monument).

If they make the monument large enough, it might have room for a few more names.

Matt Steele is a certified flight instructor and real estate associate broker in Wasilla.