Archive for the ‘Judicial Branch’ Category

Though she didn’t admit it during her interview with KSTP’s Tom Hauser, Tina Smith’s dipping and dodging said that she’s a yes vote for packing the US Supreme Court. When asked if she’d vote to expand the Supreme Court and blow up the Constitution, Sen. Smith said “It is completely premature to talk about what we would do with the Supreme Court because we don’t know what the situation is going to be. I’m going to wait and see what happens. But let’s be clear here. What is happening right now is the Republicans are packing the court by pushing through the Supreme Court nominee against the will of the American public who believe the next president, whoever that person may be, should be the one who appoints the next Supreme Court justice. They changed their rules in order to push people onto the Supreme Court that they want to have there and that’s what they’re trying to distract us all from now.”

Sen. Smith is dodging answering the question because she wants to have another 6 years in office for people to forget about her vote to dismantle the Constitution. Voting to expand the Supreme Court is a vote to dismantle the Constitution because the Constitution relies on consisting of 2 political branches and a judicial, non-political branch.

This past week gave Democrats 3 days to tell America that their preference for a Supreme Court justice was a politician in a black robe. Democrats kept asking Judge Barrett whether she’d take into consideration the impact her decisions might have if confirmed. Judge Barrett consistently said that it’s her job to interpret the law, not write the law.

If anything is obvious, it’s that Tina Smith votes with Sen. Schumer 95+ percent of the time. Here’s what Sen. Schumer recently said about destroying the Supreme Court and the Constitution:

Once you have unified Democrat DC government, the Supreme Court will become a political branch of government. The constitutional principle of checks and balances will disappear forever. The Constitution is supposed to be a limiting document in that it’s supposed to limit government. The more that government invades our lives, the fewer choices We The People have.

I’m positive that Sen. Jason Lewis would vote against expanding the Supreme Court, thereby dismantling the Constitution. I’m as positive of that as I’m positive that Tina Smith would vote for expanding the Supreme Court and dismantling the Constitution.

Because they’re the party of government, Democrats generally don’t like limiting government. The Democrats’ worst nightmare the past 5 years was RBG dying with a Republican president and a Republican majority in the US Senate. Now their worst nightmare has happened, they’re thinking of ways to change the rules. That’s why expanding the Supreme Court is imperative to Democrats. To do that, they need Tina Smith in the Senate so Democrats can become the majority. They need unified Democrat governance in DC.

It’s time to expose the Democrats’ Supreme Court agenda and its ramifications. First, it’s time to stop calling it “packing the Supreme Court.” That’s too vague. It’s better to call it expanding and politicizing the Supreme Court. Madison, Jefferson and Hamilton established an independent judiciary that was a check on the 2 political (Executive and Legislative) branches that was free of partisanship.

The importance of checks and balances can’t be overemphasized. Without checks and balances, the potential for mob rule increases exponentially. The ability to ram through ill-advised, counterproductive legislation becomes relatively easy. Mob rule, supported by a partisan judiciary significantly increases the likelihood of trampling people’s civil rights. Democrats have said that they’d confiscate law-abiding citizens’ AR-15s and AK-47s. This summer, Democrat city councils in Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle and NYC have voted to cut their cities’ police department budgets. Minneapolis voted to dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department, though that isn’t likely to happen anymore.

Gun-grabbing Democrats, from U.S. Senate candidate Mark Kelly to megabillionaire Democrat presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg, push bills that would gut the Second Amendment. Couple that with installing partisan justices on the SCOTUS and major cuts in police funding and you’ve got a recipe for chaotic, out-of-control societies.

Another major downside to expanding the Supreme Court with partisan activists is that Democrats wouldn’t need to win major legislative victories. Democrats could just pass minor bills. Then Democrats could have one of their activists file a lawsuit and have the Supreme Court make the policy changes it couldn’t win through the legislative process.

Joe Biden stepped in it during this Q & A:

LOCAL REPORTER: But don’t the voters deserve to know…interrupted
BIDEN: No, they don’t des…I’m not going to play his game.

Let’s just be blunt. Vice President Biden doesn’t have the temperament to be commander-in-chief. Also, he isn’t smart enough. He’s actually had an over-sized ego. He’s had over-sized positions that he isn’t qualified for.

The Democrats’ SCOTUS agenda would essentially gut the Constitution by eliminating the non-political branch of government, then replacing it with an unelected activist branch of government. If that sounds like a wise system of government, move to Cuba or Venezuela.

If you’re as tired of hearing Republicans and Democrats complain about the other being a hypocrite about confirming Supreme Court justices, get in line. Better yet, let’s change the subject to something worthwhile. Since the process is going forward, let’s talk about the Constitution and Judge Barrett’s qualifications:

  1. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution assigns the authority for nominating Supreme Court justices to the president up to the day he leaves office.
  2. Article 1, Section 3 of the Constitution says that the term of the Senate is 6 years.
  3. Article VI prohibits religious tests, saying “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”
  4. Amy Coney-Barrett’s credentials are impressive.
These 4 things won’t change, meaning that all the huffing and puffing happening in Washington, DC, is theatrics. Theatrics should be ignored because they’re unimportant. What’s important is that, at least until January 20, 2021 and perhaps longer, President Trump has the constitutional authority to appoint judges to the courts. What’s important is that the Senate has the authority to confirm judges to the Supreme Court. What’s important is for Democrats to refrain from talking about Judge Barrett’s Catholic faith. What’s important is that Judge Amy Coney-Barrett is more than qualified to be a Supreme Court justice.

This is whining at its worst:

This is what religious bigotry in the 21st Century looks like and how to respond to it:

Sen. Harris, Joe Biden’s running mate, is part of the Senate Judiciary Committee. She’s put her prosecutor’s hat on against Republican judicial appointees. Sen. Harris’ biggest weakness is her ego. She thinks she’s smarter than she is. That might get her in trouble. Judge Barrett is a truly smart, likable person. Shifting into attack mode isn’t the wisest tactic.