in

Far Left Professors Push Dems to Pack Courts With Judicial Activists

The claim that judicial activism is necessary to rescue us from bondage to the past– from having the writers of the Constitution “rule us from the grave”– defies both logic and history. There is no contest between the living and the dead. The contest is between those living individuals who wish to see control of change in judicial hands and those who wish to see it in other hands. – Dr. Thomas Sowell

FoxNews.com reports that

Less than a month after the confirmation of Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh entrenched a 5-4 conservative majority on the Supreme Court, leading law professors are urging Democrats to expand the size of all of the nation’s federal courts and pack them with liberals. 

Far-left Harvard professors Mark Tushnet and Laurence Tribe are lending their support to the so-called “1.20.21 Project,” which was launched by political science professor Aaron Belkin on Wednesday to counter “Republican obstruction, theft and procedural abuse” of the federal judiciary.

That rhetoric reflects the professors’ apparent surprise after Democrats lost the 2016 presidential election, which they had hoped would allow the party to continue appointing liberal judges and justices. In 2016, when Hillary Clinton was leading in all major polls in her bid for the presidency, Tushnet definitively declared in a blog post that conservatives were the “losers in the culture wars.”

He wrote that liberal judges who “no longer have to be worried about reversal by the Supreme Court” could be useful in marginalizing those Republican “losers,” whom he compared to the defeated Japanese in World War II or the Confederacy in the Civil War.

The heated language also highlights what liberals have characterized as the unfair treatment of President Obama’s failed nominee to the Supreme Court, Merrick Garland. In 2016, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, refused to hold a hearing or vote on Garland, saying a lame-duck president shouldn’t be able to appoint a justice in an election year. Garland didn’t have enough support in the GOP-held Senate to win confirmation.

At Kavanaugh’s ceremonial swearing-in ceremony earlier this month, President Trump led a standing ovation for McConnell, whom he called a “great” leader who has done an “incredible job for the American people.” Under McConnell and Trump, Republicans have now confirmed 26 federal appellate judges and two Supreme Court justices. (Kavanaugh’s rise to the Supreme Court creates a new vacancy on the influential D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where he had served for 12 years.)

That fast pace of conservative judicial appointments has upended and frustrated some of the assumptions of liberal law professors like Tushnet, who wrote just two years ago: “Right now more than half of the judges sitting on the courts of appeals were appointed by Democratic presidents, and – though I wasn’t able to locate up-to-date numbers – the same appears to be true of the district courts.”

Liberal academics have long floated the possibility of flooding the bench with Democrats, although the 1.20.21 Project is their most organized effort to date. For example, another far-left law professor, Indiana University’s Ian Samuel, wrote on Twitter as soon as then-Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement in June that Democrats should “[p]ack the courts” as urgently as they should “abolish ICE.”

Still, this latest effort also underscored the intensely left-leaning politics of most of the nation’s academia. During Kavanaugh’s confirmation process, thousands of progressive law professors signed a letter saying Kavanaugh’s temperament during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings in September was disqualifying. Kavanaugh forcefully denied the uncorroborated attempted rape and other sexual misconduct accusations against him.

And Tribe, who has accused President Trump of “orchestrating a massive cover-up” that is “worse” than anything done by former President Richard Nixon, is himself no stranger to partisan politics. In 2015, a piece in The New Yorker by law professor Tim Wu asked, “Did Laurence Tribe Sell Out?” The article noted that “it would … be foolish to ignore the inherent tension in searching for truth while also working for paying clients,” as Tribe does.

For the last several decades, and especially during the Obama Administration, the Liberals of the Democratic Party have relied upon Judicial Activism to overturn the will of the American People and to “get their way” on matters of political and societal importance.

Sometimes they win and sometimes they lose.

A big win for the Democrats was the Supreme court ruling allowing gays to get married.

It was taken to the courts by the Democrats after American Citizens voted not to allow gay marriage in their states. Liberal Judicial Activist Judges, some gay themselves, began striking down the referendums passed in individual states, finally leading to a ruling by the United States Supreme Court.

During the Trump Administration, Judicial Activists have attempted to thwart some of the actions taken of behalf of the American People by our President, such as their attempts to stop the Travel Ban, designed to keep those who would seek to do Americans harm out of our Sovereign Nation.

According to Founding Father Alexander Hamilton, in the following Federalist Paper, Americans have nothing to fear from the Judiciary when they act alone. It’s when they act in concert with others, such as Liberal Politicians in Congress, that Americans need to be afraid.

From The Federalist #78

Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.

As the 2018 Midterm Elections draw near, we, as Americans, must remember that the Majority Party in both houses of Congress and the President are the ones who will shape our Judicial System for decades to come.

That is why we must get out and vote.

If we do not, and allow the Far Left Democratic Party to take back control of Capitol Hill, our Judiciary will change from one who interprets and enforces the Constitution to one who rewrites and ignores it.

This must not be allowed to happen.

We must, once again, envelop our nation in a “Sea of Red”, like we did on November 8, 2016.

Our future as a Constitutional Republic depends on it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 
kingsjester

Written by kingsjester

Do you ever feel helpless about what's going on? Do you turn the sound down when a member of "The Resistance" speaks? Do you talk back to the television? I understand fully. My blog contains the views of a 61 year old Christian American Conservative. I was raised by members of The Greatest Generation. My father landed at Normandy. I love this country. By the way, how did that Hopey-Changey Thing work out for ya?

I have been writing daily since April of 2010. I enjoy researching and sharing my thoughts with you. It is a privilege and it beats the heck out of punching a hole in the wall.

Thanks for reading my posts!

I'll keep writing....

Until He Comes,

KJ

Loading…

Beto O’Rourke isn’t Running for Senate, He’s Running for President

open thread sparta report

Wednesday Open Thread