The American Spectator "Nobody voted for judicial supremacy, and it certainly wasn’t the Founding Fathers’ intent."
"But the coming showdown could easily have been averted two weeks ago, and Roberts and Barrett blew it. This is all Roberts’s fault. And he has absolutely no room to lecture anyone else about judicial impeachments."
"Several days back, when one of the near-countless cases of judicial overreach in which partisan Democrat operatives in black robes issued absurd orders delaying presidential orders involving immigration issues or spending reforms or other changes well within the sole purview of the executive branch made its way to the Supreme Court for review, this column discussed a piece by the Federalist’s John Daniel Davidson that shredded the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett for siding with the Democrats.
"After noting that for procedural reasons the specific case in question would likely still come out all right, I joined Davidson’s rejection of Roberts and Barrett. From that entry…
Still, this was a missed opportunity, and Davidson isn’t wrong in his fury over it. The correct ruling would have been a sharp rebuke of the district court on jurisdictional grounds and an unmistakable signal that these restraining orders are all null and void, and it’s time for the courts to stop granting them. It was an act of cowardice and dereliction by the constitutional court not to provide a clear statement of constitutional law when given an opportunity.
Do better, dammit.
"Well, that was almost two weeks ago, and things have only gotten worse. The number of absurdly partisan judicial orders purporting to thwart the Trump administration’s executive actions — whether deporting illegal aliens, scrubbing the federal budget, laying off superfluous or unproductive federal employees, or other items that involve things purely within the purview of Article II powers under the Constitution — has only grown.
"We’ve had a federal judge order President Trump to rehire 30,000 federal employees he laid off. We’ve had more than one order him to spend money which violated an executive order he’d given.
"And over the weekend, one of the silliest and most corrupt judges in America, James Boasberg of the federal district court in Washington, D.C., actually ordered the Trump administration to turn planes around that were in the process of deporting Tren de Aragua gang members to a prison in El Salvador." . . .
"I’ve recognized manipulation in the past, and I see it now on the Supreme Court" . . ."And then there was my perplexity in 2005 when I found myself wondering why G.W. Bush had appointed Roberts, the “new guy,” directly into being Chief Justice of our Supreme Court rather than elevating a more experienced judge to that position. At the time, he seemed like a lightweight compared to Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. I thought he should be learning from them rather than being the chief.
"Now, we are facing the reality of that appointment, and I find myself wondering even more why we cannot fix the broken Supreme Court. We have a Chief Justice who belongs to the same secretive “club” as patently evil Judge Boasberg, chief judge of the DC district court. We have a supposedly “conservative” justice under whose robes, reliably, the dregs of our leftist society can sweep their evil manipulation of government. I now better understand how he could say that those questioning the 2020 election had no “standing.' ”. . .
An eye for an eye, an order for order . . ."Another way to respond to these lawless activist judges is simply to ignore their decisions. Issue blunt and stinging rebukes to their overreach, and carry on with Executive Branch activities as if they had never been involved. This will cause the Democrat party’s mainstream media outlets to scream that there is a “constitutional crisis,” but again, I think there is sufficient new media firepower to override that dead horse with the response that whatever “crisis” exists is solely due to the Judicial Branch’s inability to stay in its own constitutional lane." . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment