RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Are Dems Right To Panic Over The Court? Five Originalists Weigh In - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Are Dems Right To Panic Over The Court? Five Originalists Weigh In Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Liz 

  • 1.4% Neanderthal
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 49,300
  • Joined: 28-February 03

  Posted 07 September 2018 - 08:56 PM

Are Dems Right To Panic Over The Court? Five Originalists Weigh In

American Greatness
By Karin McQuillan
September 5th, 2018

Excerpt:

My intuition is that the Democrats are not panicking enough about the pending confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court. They’ve been so busy ginning up their base with claims that Kavanaugh will spell the end of abortion and gay marriage that they haven’t focused on the more likely, and larger, impacts of an originalist court. Trump’s court will change America.

Kavanaugh is most robust in defending the Constitution on foundational questions, not the headline grabbers. This is good news.

An originalist court will bring needed changes to everyday life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We’ve already seen several dramatic victories when Justice Neil Gorsuch joined the court last term. This was a foretaste of far-reaching changes to come. Reinstating constitutional safeguards against government power will be significant for religious freedom, free speech, curtailing racial preferences, unleashing free enterprise, and stopping unaccountable government.

In Justice Anthony Kennedy’s last term, when he sided with the conservative justices, we saw that a faithful reading of the Constitution can be revolutionary. In Janus v. AFSCME, government workers were freed from compulsory union fees. Unions spent almost $2 billion on lobbying and campaign contributions in 2016, raised with those compulsory fees. Janus may cut the cycle of Democrat politicians voting for ruinous salaries and pensions, which bankrupt local and state government, as the cost of union support. And it set an important legal precedent for undoing poor court decisions from the past.

The Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling in favor of a Christian baker targeted by gay rights activists, trying to force him to bake a gay wedding cake, was an important victory for free exercise of religion. Even liberal Justice Kagan, who was furious at what she called “weaponizing the First Amendment” in the Janus case, joined the consensus defending the First Amendment in the Masterpiece case which was decided on a 7-2 majority.

Breaking the Grip of Stare Decisis and Chevron Deference

Is my intuition right about the game-changing power of honoring our Constitution? To answer this question, I sought out five of the best originalist legal minds in the country. In one interview after another, these judges and Supreme Court lawyers agreed about the importance of President Trump selecting originalist justices. The two legal mainstays that allow the Deep State to continue its power grab unchecked are about to be slowly but methodically dismantled.

These much-misused legal doctrines are stare decisis and Chevron deference. In the 20th century, stare decisis and the Chevron deference enabled the explosive expansion of the executive bureaucracy and of government power over all areas of life and the economy. These technical terms will never become household words, but changing them will affect every household in America.

Stare decisis means not overturning precedent, even if the precedent was wrongly decided and unconstitutional. It is often quoted by liberals to argue that Roe v. Wade is sacrosanct.

Chevron deference is a doctrine that says the courts should defer to the executive branch agencies, allowing them to write regulations and policy that carry the force of law, with only limited judicial review. It delegates interpreting laws to bureaucrats, which deprive citizens of recourse to court review. This gives a green light to executive overreach. For example, the Obama administration did not have to bother trying to pass a transgender bathroom law. A government bureaucrat merely reinterpreted Title IX of the Civil Rights Act to define unisex bathrooms as discriminatory based on newly invented gender rights.

It has been almost a century since progressives on the Supreme Court radically transformed America’s legal traditions. We will not see abrupt and rapid change, as when progressives legislated from the bench in Roe v Wade or dictating gay marriage. The Trump court will be the beginning of a new era of slower, case by case progress back to constitutional limits on government power.

*snip*

Full Commentary
0

#2 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 24,854
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 07 September 2018 - 09:58 PM

Let’s hope the author is correct.
0

#3 User is offline   grimreefer 

  • U.S. Merchant Marine
  • View gallery
  • Group: Diamond Community Supporter
  • Posts: 3,374
  • Joined: 18-December 03

Posted 08 September 2018 - 12:21 AM

Yes they are right to panic. How else will they enact new laws?
0

#4 User is offline   Big Dave 

  • ...and yes, I am compensating for something.
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 2,522
  • Joined: 03-March 04

Posted 08 September 2018 - 05:06 AM

View Postgrimreefer, on 08 September 2018 - 12:21 AM, said:

Yes they are right to panic. How else will they enact new laws?

The brilliance of Ben Sasse's exposition during the hearings on the real problem we have comes to mind. Dems have ceased trying to legislate. The only major legislation they have been responsible for in the last 30 years has been the "assault weapons ban" and Obamacare. Both were disasters. The ban did nothing but rile up pro 2nd Amendment forces (and lose the Dems the House and Senate) and Obamacare has turned whatever it touched to merde' ( great French word!). Because they have crawled into an increasingly narrower ideological channel, they have lost the ability to negotiate, give and take, and truly find consensus--the basis of our legislative system. The only way they have to accomplish anything is by judicial fiat, or Obama's pen and phone, and we saw that those worked like chalk on the sidewalk because he really didn't know what he was doing.
And so judges become like feudal lords, imposing their will over the people based on their narrow understanding and their large egos and bias.
Maybe a defeat this fall might cause them to reflect like they did after 1994, but I doubt it.
To be fair, the budgetary excreta produced by Republicans shows they haven't done much better, but they are at least legislating..... :coffeenpc:
0

#5 User is online   Gertie Keddle 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Platinum
  • Posts: 21,084
  • Joined: 12-August 03

Posted 08 September 2018 - 06:35 AM

http://tammybruce.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/dem-sign-e1536335361103.png


But Trump might have a dispropotiate influnce!
0

#6 User is offline   grimreefer 

  • U.S. Merchant Marine
  • View gallery
  • Group: Diamond Community Supporter
  • Posts: 3,374
  • Joined: 18-December 03

Posted 08 September 2018 - 06:42 AM

View PostGertie Keddle, on 08 September 2018 - 06:35 AM, said:

http://tammybruce.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/dem-sign-e1536335361103.png


But Trump might have a dispropotiate influnce!

:rofl:


...but sad in that these people consider themselves our betters. :coffeenpc:


...but: :rofl:
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users