The Western Journal

Jasmine Crockett Has Vulgar Response to SCOTUS After She Lost District in Texas

An opinion piece from The Western Journal criticizes Democratic Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett for a profanity-laced YouTube video in which she told the Supreme Court “f*** you” after it temporarily upheld a Texas redistricting map that moved her out of her district. the author calls her reaction juvenile, unbecoming of an elected official, and not a serious legal critique, arguing it was a tantrum aimed at clicks rather than a reasoned response to the ruling. The piece notes Crockett praised some states’ resistance and referred dismissively to the justice who wrote a critical opinion (Samuel Alito) as “the Trump justice,” then used obscenities.The writer warns that such behavior harms the dignity of public office, sets a poor example-especially for young Black girls who may view her as a role model-and normalizes contempt for democratic institutions. The article contrasts Crockett’s outburst with other public profanity (citing former President Trump) but insists context matters and that cursing the judiciary over a legal decision signals immaturity and weakens respect for the rule of law.


I wish I could say I was even a little bit surprised.

Democratic Texas Rep. Jasmine Crockett responded to an unfavorable Supreme Court ruling the way one might expect from an online influencer mid-meltdown — not a sitting member of Congress.

In a profanity-laced YouTube video, Crockett aimed an expletive directly at the nation’s highest court after it temporarily upheld a Texas redistricting map that moved her out of her district, according to Fox News.

(The redrawn maps very likely played an outsized role in her dubious U.S. Senate bid.)

The vulgar YouTube video posted to her personal channel was pathetic, juvenile, and deeply unbecoming of an elected official sworn to uphold the Constitution, not curse at it when things don’t go her way.

This wasn’t righteous dissent or principled protest. It was a tantrum:

WARNING: The following video contains vulgar language some viewers may find offensive.

“Obviously, Trump is still doing his bidding with these state Houses and state Senates and, um, governor’s mansions to try to rig the system,” Crockett claimed about her Republican state and the conservative-majority Supreme Court. “Kudos to Indiana for saying f*** you. Um, kudos to California for saying we’re going to fight back.”

Even when she wanted to laud Justice Samuel Alito for the opinion he penned, which was mildly critical despite giving Texas Republicans what they wanted, the lawmaker was a condescending snob, not even able to utter his name.

“Um, definitely kudos to the Trump justice who wrote the 160-page opinion denouncing what took place in Texas,” she said.

Then she dropped whatever shred of decorum she had left: “And f*** you to the Supreme Court for what they did.”

What a lovely woman.

Crockett didn’t offer a serious legal critique of the ruling, or even a coherent argument about redistricting law. Instead, she opted for vulgarity and grievance, broadcasting it for clicks and applause. That may be standard fare for Democrats these days, but it’s still a stunningly unserious posture for someone entrusted with legislative power.

And that’s what makes the episode more than just embarrassing.

Like it or not, Crockett occupies a position of visibility and influence — particularly for young black girls who are told to see her as a role model. Watching a member of Congress lash out at the Supreme Court with obscenities doesn’t model courage or conviction so much as it models entitlement and impulse.

When elected officials normalize contempt for institutions the moment they lose, they don’t just cheapen themselves. They also degrade the office they hold.

I would be remiss not to note that Crockett’s defenders will inevitably rush to the whataboutism: “But Trump swore too.”

And yes — the president once snapped that Israel and Iran “don’t know what the f*** they’re doing” after both sides almost immediately violated a ceasefire he had helped broker. That remark was blunt, profane, and unmistakably Trump. But context matters, and pretending otherwise is either dishonest or unserious.

Trump’s outburst was aimed at two sovereign nations actively lobbing missiles and flirting with regional catastrophe. It was frustration directed outward at actors whose reckless behavior risked spiraling into a destabilizing war. It wasn’t a tantrum over a personal political setback, and it certainly wasn’t aimed at a coequal branch of the American government tasked with interpreting the law. Calling out geopolitical arsonists is not the same thing as cursing out the Supreme Court because you didn’t like a ruling.

That distinction is the entire ball game. One is coarse rhetoric in the service of preventing bloodshed; the other is petulant contempt for constitutional order.

When an elected lawmaker tells the nation’s highest court “f*** you” over a legal interpretation, it signals not toughness or authenticity, but immaturity and mental rot.

Democracies can survive blunt language. What they can’t survive is elected officials who treat the rule of law like a personal insult.




Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.



" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

Related Articles

Back to top button
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker