Democrats’ terrible bluff on the Supreme Court
The Week,
by
Noah Millman
Original Article
Posted By: MissMolly,
9/23/2020 4:30:09 AM
At the end of the 16th century, the advancing age of Queen Elizabeth I posed a throne-shakingly serious problem for England's future. Her reign had been largely peaceful and notably prosperous, and would be looked back upon as a golden age by future generations. However, since she had no children, it was not certain who would succeed her — and rival claims to the throne had previously led to a ruinous civil war that only ended with the accession of Elizabeth's grandfather, Henry VII. Anxiety that history could repeat itself was widespread, and can still be read between the lines of plays like Henry V and Hamlet that Shakespeare
Reply 1 - Posted by:
PChristopher 9/23/2020 5:15:23 AM (No. 549466)
Everybody assumes that Roberts will act like a conservative when talking about the possible composition of the Court. I wouldn't be so sure.
79 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 9/23/2020 6:44:13 AM (No. 549501)
Yep, from his decisions on big cases, it appears that someone has gotten to Roberts on some level. He sure ain't calling balls and strikes the way he promised during his confirmation hearings.
67 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
udanja99 9/23/2020 7:19:09 AM (No. 549521)
Ginsburg was not a “model for reasoned liberalism”. She was a left wing zealot who cited foreign law as precedence, advised other countries to model their own constitutions after South Africa’s instead of ours and was responsible for the deaths of millions of unborn children.
A lot of this article is moot because Republicans already have the votes.
82 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
rytwng 9/23/2020 7:28:37 AM (No. 549529)
What do they have on Roberts? Gay, into porn, another woman or man?
52 people like this.
And there you have it. Which party threatens to pack the court? Which party turns to the judiciary to get their agenda passed when they can't get it passed through the legislative and executive branches? Which party is prone to dictatorship when the people aren't enthralled with their ideas? The author sees what's going on, but, of course, approves of Democrat judicial machinations.
39 people like this.
Noah seems to miss the fact that the Republicans are not about a tilt to the right but a tilt to the Constitution. He acts like this is just a matter of opinion. The Court is supposed to be tied to the Constitution not a right or left legislature. It is the branch that determines if we are living up to our promises to the people which were spelled out in the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution is the means by which we uphold those promises. It is the road map for keeping a free people free. It is not a living thing it is a set of rules by which we maintain that freedom that is a God given right. If you want to change them then there is a process spelled out on how to do it. But changing those rules by people like Ginsberg who saw rights where there were none and took rights away from unborn humans when that is clearly forbidden is not the way to continue as a free republic.
Most scholars know that Roe was bad law and the questions of abortion should have been left to the states. It should be sent back to them. Justice Marshal said at the time that if when life begins is clearly determined in the future then Roe would be made moot because of the protection of human life spelled out clearly in the Constitution. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, Life is listed first of course. The heartbeat bill is probably the best of the solutions. All of Europe has a first trimester limit on abortions, we seem to be the only so called civilized society that thinks killing babies as they are being born is a good idea. How that does not make you inhumane I do not know but I wish someone would come up with a better answer than has offered to this date.
49 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 9/23/2020 8:09:09 AM (No. 549560)
Typical liberal babble.
"the Court, inasmuch as it serves as a proxy for conflicts over culture, religion, and identity"
But THAT perception is the problem. It is NOT the job of the courts to settle these issues. It is the court's job to determine if EXISTING law, as WRITTEN, and INTENDED addresses the issue and what remedies IN THE LAW exist. The question isn't if abortion should be legal, per se. It is whether law actually exists that allowed the courts to legitimize abortion. The Conservative belief is that that such law does not exist. It was made up by the SCOTUS as they robbed power specifically designated to Congress. For each such issue the liberals want to establish, law does not exist and they want the courts to make it up. Conservatives want such issues to be addressed by Congress or the states. The problem has been and continues to be that liberals cannot win enough elections to pass such legislation. They were road blocked so they focused on breaking the courts to get what they want.
As to Conservative issues, they also need to be dealt with in Congress. Often existing law is in favor of Republican intent or is silent. The court need only be concerned with existing law, not the issue. The courts are NOT a Mr. FIx it for the problems of society.
"Of course, this (court packing) is what Republicans are doing to the Court right now."
This is a lie. Court packing is creating NEW court positions and then packing them with your chosen candidates to swing the balance of the court. Republicans have NOT expanded the number of SCOTUS justices. They have simply used the traditional and Constitutionally prescribed method of winning elections for President and Senate, fortuitously timed vacancies, and a boast from Harry Reid by eliminating filibusters of judicial appointments.
32 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
bpl40 9/23/2020 8:11:38 AM (No. 549562)
Well over 70% voters want the seat to be filled before the election as the risk of a 4/4 divided court becomes clearer and more pervasive. IMO, there is little chance of Republican candidates suffering from such an appointment than is feared. Arizona - maybe. But that is because of the poor quality of the candidate. Anyway, consequences of dithering on this one will be disastrous - for the Republican Party. Fortunately they seem to realize it.
26 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Dodge Boy 9/23/2020 8:29:07 AM (No. 549590)
Dims and msm, your goose is cooked...for now, anyway.
19 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
swarfer 9/23/2020 8:51:16 AM (No. 549618)
Mr. Milligan misses the key point - takeover of the Democratic Party by liberal extremists. There is no place for traditional Democrats whose moral, practical and patriotic inclinations coincide with Republicans. They will always shed voters as they move left. Republicans are not moving either direction. The are not espousing any new positions. Some my think so but it is an illusion due their successes under TRUMP.
13 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
Submariner 9/23/2020 9:48:17 AM (No. 549679)
He comes to the right conclusion (empty threats) for all the wrong reasons. I did appreciate the analysis of both parties' prospects in the Senate, based on voting patterns in rural and urban areas. Another thing - the Left has been exposed as the agents of extortion, with prominent Democrat office holders functioning as their spokesmen and enablers. this election will very likely reflect the public's revulsion with them.
9 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
bigfatslob 9/23/2020 10:58:54 AM (No. 549774)
I see Roberts as sitting on the side of leftist and don't count on him at all. He flipped on Obamacare and other decisions after that he can't be trusted. Ginsberg has no respect for the 'American Constitution' and said so when she opted for foreign countries as being superior to the US Constitution. That's a zealot loser if you ask me.
13 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
janjan 9/23/2020 11:05:38 AM (No. 549783)
The media are accusing the Republicans of ‘packing the court’ to divert attention from what is really being threatened. The President has filled empty seats which is his constitutional obligation and he is of course choosing justices who follow constructionist doctrine. The same way a Democrat would be looking for liberal activists. Packing the court is the act of adding additional justices to overturn the voters intent. Liberals are happy to be lead by politicians who don’t care what they think.
7 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
Varjo 9/23/2020 11:45:18 AM (No. 549838)
#4 may be right. I think Roberts has some kind of secret that the left can use as leverage.
10 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Hard Nard 9/23/2020 11:53:50 AM (No. 549851)
Re #4 and #14 - Roberts name is reportedly seen a few times on Epsteins' flight logs, so there's a possible blackmail angle.
5 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
little guy 9/23/2020 11:54:55 AM (No. 549853)
The Deo-rats can't play poker worth a damn. They are bluffing again --- and Trump is calling their bluff! They don't have a full house, just two pair. Trump, however, is holding the straight flush.
Packing the Supreme Court? Really? That will require a law ... meaning it must go through both the House and Senate and then be signed into law. By who? The President! Which will be Trump for the next four years. And any act of Congress can be undone by a future Congress. The Dems are bluffing they will have all THREE branches of government in 2021. Highly doubtful.
And why no talk about the vulnerable Demo-rat Senators running this year? Like Shaheen in New Hampshire, Doug Jones in Alabama, Peters in Michigan, and Tina Smith in Minnesota? The Republicans could pick up all four and give up Collins, McSally and Ernst and still end up with 54!
Adding states to the Union? Really? That can only happen when the territory votes to become a state and then, again, Congress approves such an addition --- which, again, requires the President's signature. Only Puerto Rico did actually vote that way in 2017 but only that island and Washington, D.C. (barely) has enough people to actually qualify --- and many in D.C. are transitory, i.e. only there while working for a Congressperson.
There will be a long time before you see any new states. But just in case --- we can always split Red states and create North and South Alaska and East And West Oklahoma!
5 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
Justcurious 9/23/2020 12:33:05 PM (No. 549884)
From the article:
"Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a legitimate hero to millions of Americans, a jurisprudential giant and a model for reasoned liberalism."
Yet, the souls of millions of murdered children cry out from the grave. Legitimate hero, indeed.
11 people like this.
AOC's call for violence if President Trump is able to get a court nomination passed. Is this an act of sedition? If so, why hasn't someone done something about her threats? I blame most elected Dems and Pubbies for the mess we are in. Complacent. Looking out for their own interests. Cowtowing to rabble rousers. Of course we the people can be blamed for electing the criminals who are intent on destroying this country. Took 50+ to get this to work. Still think AOC is guilty of sedition...Any one who calls for the over through of our country should be tried, convicted and sent up the river.
8 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
MindMadeUp 9/23/2020 1:02:52 PM (No. 549908)
This is wrong: "Liberal Democrats view the Courts as an essential bulwark of individual rights."
No. They now care more about group rights than those of the individual. They view the court as a way to do an end run around Constitutional limitations on their power. With an unelected, untouchable High Court handing down politically biased decisions, they don't have to deal with messy things like votes and the will of the people to actually make laws.
3 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
thehutchcom 9/23/2020 1:16:14 PM (No. 549915)
Millman has some good analysis here, but he's pulled away from the truth by a fundamentally left view of the Court. He sees both sides as wanting *activism*; conservatives want a Court that enforces the law but does not MAKE the law. I don't know anybody who seeks the appointment of Conservative activist judges who will go out and declare things that Republicans want to get done but can't. We want people who stick to the written law, and the most "activist" thing we want is the overruling of past bad interpretation by past courts. Millman needs to get to know some Republicans.
2 people like this.
Reply 21 - Posted by:
Zigrid 9/23/2020 5:10:57 PM (No. 550200)
Don't WE all remember obama chastising the republicans the that he was going to do it his way... "elections have consequences" he said.... yes... they certainly do... WE won the Presidency and the Senate and therefore... President Trump will name his candidate for the Supreme Court... and the Senate will confirm her.... the Bloomberg and soros rent a mob will riot and burn and the new Justice will be seated...
3 people like this.
Reply 22 - Posted by:
OK state mom 9/23/2020 8:41:36 PM (No. 550383)
#4, #14, #15 there is bona fide suspicion Roberts and his wife illegally adopted their children. However, those same children are now 20 years old so it shouldn't matter.
2 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "MissMolly"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)