"There are countless horrible things happening all over the world and horrible people prospering, but we must never allow them to disturb our equanimity or deflect us from our sacred duty to sabotage and annoy them whenever possible." -Auberon Waugh
In the last few months the Supreme Court has been moving toward eliminating the ability of Lawfare allied federal judges from ordering nationwide injunctions. The latest SCOTUS decision was 7-2 to stop this Lawfare practice. If activist judges are stopped from blocking executive branch policy, this creates a serious problem for the Lawfare Alliance.
Simultaneously, President Trump is filling vacancies on the federal bench at a strong rate. President Trump has now appointed 150 federal judges into the judicial bloodstream. This further impedes the ability of the ideological Lawfare Alliance to achieve their objectives.
With the Supreme Court tenuously holding a 5-4 conservative outlook, and the strong possibility the loss of Justice Ginsburg might create a 6-3 court, the Lawfare group is now lashing out and planning for ways to retain their position.
I'm sure many people will see this as a conspiracy theory, and there's reason to be skeptical.
But consider ... ...
--> The malignant and on-going smear campaign against SCOTUS members. Kavanaugh is but the latest example of that. Most of the democratic POTUS candidates -- including sitting members of Congress -- demanded his impeachment solely due to a poorly written/edited and libelous NYT article that was IMMEDIATELY corrected. That correction was in an underhanded fashion, but it was corrected.
--> SCOTUS was generally held in esteem by all parties prior to 2016. Then, President Trump appointed two members, and could well appoint a third, destroying the generally left leaning bench. Now, there are serious and open attacks against it, from the left. The threatening letter, sent by democrats sitting in the United States Senate is one example. Another is a "grass roots" effort to put term limits on SCOTUS members (which requires that the Consitution be amended, a minor point ignored by the campaign).
--> As recently as 2018, the "It's the law of the land!" argument was standard with the left ( a/k/a progressives, and generally socialists as well). IIRC, Obama started that trend. But I've not heard that argument used since PDT began appointing non-activist judges to federal benches. And SCOTUS started rejecting decisions by activist judges.
The effort to delegitimize the federal government as a whole (read the whole article) is consistent with this.
The left lost the 2016 elections, and they could lose the 2020 elections. Those who think that the leaders of this group are not willing to do what it takes to gain and maintain power, well, this article won't convince them. But they shouldn't be surprised if matters really go to hell. I'm sure that many of them WILL be surprised (willful ignorance goes a long way), though.
1 comment:
In the last few months the Supreme Court has been moving toward eliminating the ability of Lawfare allied federal judges from ordering nationwide injunctions. The latest SCOTUS decision was 7-2 to stop this Lawfare practice. If activist judges are stopped from blocking executive branch policy, this creates a serious problem for the Lawfare Alliance.
Simultaneously, President Trump is filling vacancies on the federal bench at a strong rate. President Trump has now appointed 150 federal judges into the judicial bloodstream. This further impedes the ability of the ideological Lawfare Alliance to achieve their objectives.
With the Supreme Court tenuously holding a 5-4 conservative outlook, and the strong possibility the loss of Justice Ginsburg might create a 6-3 court, the Lawfare group is now lashing out and planning for ways to retain their position.
I'm sure many people will see this as a conspiracy theory, and there's reason to be skeptical.
But consider ... ...
--> The malignant and on-going smear campaign against SCOTUS members. Kavanaugh is but the latest example of that. Most of the democratic POTUS candidates -- including sitting members of Congress -- demanded his impeachment solely due to a poorly written/edited and libelous NYT article that was IMMEDIATELY corrected. That correction was in an underhanded fashion, but it was corrected.
--> SCOTUS was generally held in esteem by all parties prior to 2016. Then, President Trump appointed two members, and could well appoint a third, destroying the generally left leaning bench. Now, there are serious and open attacks against it, from the left. The threatening letter, sent by democrats sitting in the United States Senate is one example. Another is a "grass roots" effort to put term limits on SCOTUS members (which requires that the Consitution be amended, a minor point ignored by the campaign).
--> As recently as 2018, the "It's the law of the land!" argument was standard with the left ( a/k/a progressives, and generally socialists as well). IIRC, Obama started that trend. But I've not heard that argument used since PDT began appointing non-activist judges to federal benches. And SCOTUS started rejecting decisions by activist judges.
The effort to delegitimize the federal government as a whole (read the whole article) is consistent with this.
The left lost the 2016 elections, and they could lose the 2020 elections. Those who think that the leaders of this group are not willing to do what it takes to gain and maintain power, well, this article won't convince them. But they shouldn't be surprised if matters really go to hell. I'm sure that many of them WILL be surprised (willful ignorance goes a long way), though.
Post a Comment