Posted on 07/10/2025 4:36:18 AM PDT by MtnClimber
In Trump’s first term the Supreme Court could not issue an injunction preventing him from saving the Supreme Court. We are so fortunate that Hillary lost.
From Israel to the United States, via Europe, the judicial coup d'état has become permanent. In the West, it is not the executive that threatens the separation of powers. It is faceless judges lacking democratic legitimacy who legislate on the pretext of judging.
Excellent article.
What we would look like is not rule of law but lawlessness and anarchy as the oligarchy seized power and protected themselves and left the rest of us to live in the hell on earth they created.
Indeed we are. And I will never forget waking up, thinking that she HAD won, and then finding out otherwise in a call from my sister: “Can you believe it! THANK GOD!” I had no idea, and found it hard to believe, but was quite, quite happy.
“Currently at the U.S. Supreme Court, the conservatives hold a 6-3 majority.”
Wanted to stop reading there, but I rolled my eyes and continued.
When it comes to President Trump intervening in what the democrats were doing and planning to do, I’ll always believe God’s hand was on all of it.
Think about all the things that had to happen and NOT happen for him to be POTUS....ESPECIALLY this time.....it had to be supernatural to a certain degree.....that’s what I think anyway.
This is exactly why the Executive has to HIMSELF stand up for his rights when the courts trash law reason and tradition. Giving a corrupt institution the final vote on the question is insane. We’re not talking about the grey area of written law here that is the courts bailiwick.
Someone pass the word to the Wisconsin GOP - they were asleep at the switch as the Wisconsin Supreme Court was flipped. That oversight will take years to reverse.
It isn’t 6-3 conservative. More like 4-5.
There is a bit of fear porn in this article. The fact is that there is a solid, somewhat conservative majority on the court. The court is undoing a lot of bad liberal jurisprudence. Could it be better? Sure. But its as good as it has been in a long time. This is a time to celebrate and use the court to achieve conservative aims. Not worry about what happens if Liberals take a 6-3 majority.
I do have a pet peeve when people call the court a 6-3 conservative court. At best it is a 5-3-1 Court as Roberts is not a conservative. It is a 6-3 Republican President appointed court. But Democrats do a better job at appointing ideological loyalists.
“The Fate Of The U.S. If The Left Got Control Of The Supreme Court”
...and Mark Levin was good with this through much of 2016, including through a month after the convention, when it was officially either Trump or Skunk Cabbage. He only decided to support Trump that September, after his (crashing) ratings came in. And all because Trump fought back against Cruz.
So much for him being our “Constitutional Scholar”...he was more of a “Constitutional Terrorist” in those days.
Oh, and possibly Dobbs/Roe's repeal, too.
Stick with me.
The Lifeguard of Chappaquiddick is largely responsible for the destruction of Robert Bork's SCOTUS candidacy. That slot was occupied by Justice Anthony Kennedy ultimately.
Justice Kennedy was a squish. But he DID side with the majority in Heller. That's big.
Ah, but what if Bork hadn't been Borked. Well...the truth is... Bork MAY have voted against Heller.
In Slouching Towards Gomorrah, Bork referred to the language of the Second Amendment as “somewhat ambiguous[].” In the same passage, he stated that “The Second Amendment was designed to allow states to defend themselves against a possibly tyrannical national government.”[4] While it is clear that Bork was opposed to gun control on policy grounds, it is not clear that he agreed that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right. In fact, Bork’s skepticism regarding the gun lobby’s advocacy of individual rights under the Second Amendment (shared by former Chief Justice Warren Burger) may have been the reason the National Rifle Association chose to remain neutral during Bork’s 1987 confirmation hearings. Moreover, Bork might have been reluctant to overrule (or distinguish into irrelevance) the arguably contrary precedent in United States v. Miller[5], which is what the majority in Heller did. It appears that Bork construed Miller the same way Justice Stevens’ dissent in Heller did: as ruling that the Second Amendment confers a collective, not an individual, right. The way he put it in Slouching Towards Gomorrah (12 years before Heller) was: “The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that there is no individual right to own a firearm.”
By blocking Bork and paving the way for Kennedy, Uncle Ted very possibly helped save the legality of the Individual Model.
It gets better.
Bork died in 2012 during Obama. That would have guaranteeing a leftist nut-job replacing Bork, tipping the scales to a 5-4 liberal SCOTUS majority until Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg died in 2020. That is a LOT of bad rulings.
It also means no 6-3 margin for Dobbs, Bruen, or EPA. Parenthetically, anyone whining about ACB et al look at actual empirical evidence vs conservative surrender-monkey nonsense.
So Ted, you magnificent liberal, wherever you are, thank you for being a friend of the NRA and patriotic Americans.
Yes I know, here on Free Republic , only Alito and Thomas are described as conservatives.
It depends on people’s point of view. The MSNBC crowd and most in the media, consider the court to be 6-3 conservative.
They really should clarify that six were appointed by Republicans, but that does not mean they are going to be conservative in every single case, which comes before the court.
If they get Congress back they will pack the Supreme and legalize all illegals to vote. Instant permanent majority.
Our freedom still hangs by a thin thread.
They have control now.
As much as I can’t stand Mitch McConnell, we really owe that dude for his ballsy, unprecedented Merrick Garland nuking.
the three liberal justices (Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson) Three blind mice, three blind mice...
A TRULY frightening thing to consider! The SC would immediately dispense with all Constitutional regard and institute fascist liberalism upon America citizens. America would quickly become a cesspool of the worst that current democrat run States now endure...
unfortunately, it WOULD then be time for the patriots of the United States to bear arms against them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.