I’ll tell you what’s leftist, and relevant for a forum discussion point:
- Advocating the constitutional argument that the elected branches do not have total control over the federal courts in questions of composition and scope of authority.
That’s leftist. And absolutely contrary to the constitution as plainly understood.
That’s your first lesson in strict constructionism. I encourage you to share it with your sewing circle.
You don’t get to decide what is relevant.
What you are advocating for is a communist takeover of government. Whether you like it or not, there is a law above even the Constitution.
For example, let’s say the democrats gained control of the House, Senate and White House and then packed the court. They then pass a law banning all firearms, the right to self defense and declare Christianity unlawful. The newly packed court rules these new laws as Constitutional. What of your strict constructionist view then?
The constitution is not the highest law. There is a law above all human law and it is THAT law that the framers recognized.
“ whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
You might not like it, but there is nothing you can do about it.