Posted on 07/02/2012 8:01:35 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The relationship between conservatives and the Supreme Court is rather like that between Charlie Brown and Lucy Van Pelt in autumn. She always holds the football as if Charlie Brown has a fair shot at kicking it, and then she always snaps the ball away at the last moment. How many times has this happened? It has been going on since the New Deal.
When FDR began pushing through quasi-fascist policies administered by men who expressed a dreamy admiration for what Mussolini had been doing to "solve" Italy's problems, the Supreme Court actually functioned in its only useful constitutional role: as a guardian against the power lust of the other branches of the federal government.
Our own "Duce," FDR, planned to pack the Supreme Court by adding more justices than the nine on the bench in order to get decisions which allowed his vast empire of federal programs, with all the attendant political power from patronage and perks, to proceed unmolested by an independent judiciary. The court-packing scheme failed, but the impact of his plan worked: the Supreme Court became docile. "A switch in time saves nine" was the quip at the time.
Since then, the Supreme Court has consistently tacked left and allowed federal power to extend into almost every area of public life. Beyond that, the Supreme Court has been an active agent of leftism in many areas. It was not the president or Congress which stripped from state legislatures the power to regulate abortion. It was, instead, the Supreme Court, in an opinion written by one of those notional "Republican" justices which made prenatal infanticide a constitutional right under most circumstances.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Supreme Court = owned
Well, I’m ready to abolish the SCOTUS along with the rest of the federal government.
It is the enemy within.
bump
We had been euphemistically referring to our family’s only baby boy’s “boy parts” as his “member of congress” up until Thursday. Now it’s his “chief justice”.
Been saying that all along and been shouted down. Told ya.
Different people will have different feelings about which ruling destroyed their faith in the Supreme Court but for me, it was Kelo v New London.
That ruling was so far over the line as to be completely outrageous.
So, which arm of the Leviathan State wants to restrain the Leviathan State?
The peaceful remedy will be to call a Convention to clarify who is master and who is the servant in this relationship.
Such a clarification must also include denying Leviathan the means to fund itself by printing its own money and creating perpetual debt that it uses to place us in tax servitude with.
Future lessons for the Senate:
1) Consider all nominees who have previously served as Solicitor General to be immediately disqualified (since we clearly cannot count on them to have the decency to recuse on cases where they themselves were involved).
2) Absolutely no more nominees from the D.C. Circuit or D.C. Appeals bench, who are too plugged-in with the beltway social crowd and inside-the-beltway thinking. Pick nominees from state courts who will stand up for states’ rights and not care what the D.C. media is saying about them.
3) And perhaps the time has come for a Constitutional Amendment requiring the Court to issue it’s ruling no more than 72 hours after a case is heard. Since lobbying was apparently effective here, we can expect the Left to ramp up court lobbying efforts to a fever pitch on future cases.
Well, now, here we have the three most powerful people in D.C. with absolutely no checks and balances: Bernanke, Obama and Roberts.
Roberts can be out-voted by peers, but basically has the tie-breaking vote.
What would happen if, say in the case of ObamaCare, neither Congress nor the President felt any interest in honoring Robert’s decision? Who would force them? Can the SC call the cops and have them arrested? Obviously the Congress can’t call the cops on Holder, for instance.
And who really has any control over Bernanke, and how in the world would they exercise that power? And by what power - Guns? - does Bernanke have any power at all? How does that work? Arrest him for, say, treason, and he resists how?
It seems what it boils down to is this: Who has the loyalty of those with the guns? But then, isn’t that what it’s always boiled down to throughout history? How did we ever think we were an exception?
Very appropriate. Because we all know his “chief justice” will be making most of his decisions in the future.
consider Judges as a class of individuals.
Judges’ status is based on judges deciding outcomes.
Rugged individualism / self help is based on the self deciding outcomes
This means individualism of any kind threatens judicial status.
Judges are depedendent on dependency of decisionmaking.
I’m thinking we don’t have any friends.
Simple, they are statists appointed and approved by statists.
This is the result of the senate being elected directly by the populace of each state. If the senators were appointed by the state legislatures, they would be more concerned with representing states rights than a majority mob which only is concerned with their goodies.
Military Officers’ Oath:
“I, (state your name), having been appointed a (rank) in the United States (branch of service), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
The enemy within is our most serious one, i.e., liberalism, or whatever you choose to call it, it is insidious.
Note that anyone who has taken the military officers’ oath is sworn to support and defend the Constitution against enemies, foreign and domestic.
President = Lawyer
Most of Congress = Lawyers
All of Supreme Court = Lawyers
Law Schools = Lawyers teaching Lawyers
I see that Lawyers are the problem.
This started with Bush #1. I admit I was duped.
It is my opinion that Roberts was either bought off or blackmailed for his traitorous decision. If he was, it shows just how entrenched powerful and evil the criminal shadow government is.
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.