Posted on 06/15/2024 5:09:18 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
After several decades of conservative control of the Supreme Court and a string of rulings against their legislative and social priorities, Democrats and left-leaning media appear to be mounting an all-out assault against the judicial branch, casting doubt on its legitimacy and impartiality, while working to undercut the reputations and credibility of its more conservative justices.
Ostensibly conservative since the appointment of Chief Justice William Rehnquist in 1986, the court has generally not attracted comparable partisan scrutiny to the extent that it has under the Biden administration. The Roberts court, however, currently boasts three justices appointed by former President Donald Trump, who have solidified the court’s conservative character and handed conservatives decades-sought wins on abortion, gun rights, and affirmative action.
On Friday, for instance, the court ruled 6-3 against an administrative restriction from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) that banned devices attached to semi-automatic weapons that improve their rate of fire, generally known as "bump stocks." The ruling marked a win for Second Amendment advocates.
Far from an isolated incident, Supreme Court rulings have in recent years have managed to overturn decades-long practices and even long-standing precedents that favored left-wing politics. Said decisions have set off a firestorm of criticisms against the court as an institution, both of its power and ideological leaning, as well as the justices themselves. The Democrats and left-wing activists have expanded public criticism of the justices, formerly a rare occurrence, and have pursued legislative curbs on the court while some justices have even seen journalists release of private recordings of their conversations.
Conservative court wins
Apart from the bump stock case on Friday, the current court has handed down a number of landmark cases, most notably the Dobbs v. Jackson decision in 2022 that overturned the constitutional precedent establishing a federal right to abortion set...
(Excerpt) Read more at justthenews.com ...
The low tier Feral courts are the ones that need to be dissolved. That bozos are atrocious.
the present administration of hucksters and shysters was delegitimized when the vote counts were tampered with around the country.
Garner was referring to a beating with a hickory stick.
Judicial decisions involving a government might be made to only take effect after legislative confirmation, except for the return of property and the freeing of persons.
Those two exceptions would enable the courts to implement the Bill of Rights.
You need your stuff and you need your freedom.
However, if Trump criticizes the courts in NYC, it undermines our democratic institutions.
*yawn* they can scream and stomp all they want but they will accomplish nothing except to piss off someone with real power and a lifetime appointment :)
As for outragous verdicts such as the $1.5 billion, perhaps a court filing fee of 10% of the possible maximum award should be required of the plaintiff lawyer(s).
Lawyers often take a 40% contingency. They can afford to front a fourth of that.
The importance of this is that when they win, we allow them to rule but when we win, they revolt.
A lot of what goes on in this site presumes that electing Trump, or electing Republicans, will confer the same power on our government that has been exercised by the left over our protestations for decades.
Unfortunately, this is probably false.
As for appeals, they should always be available upon payment of a reasonable amount, say the amount of one’s annual federal income tax, half of that if only the award amount is in question.
ICYMI, Critical Race Theory effectively delegitimizes both our State and federal governments, because the constitutions establishing those governments were supposedly the work of racists focused on oppressing anyone who wasn’t ‘white’.
from my profile page:
JUDICIAL REFORMS
State and local governments would be given an annual opportunity to pick from the federal judges willing to serve their jurisdictions.
New federal judges below the Supreme Court level would be compensated on a fee-for-service basis. Congress would increase the fee minimums and maximums from time to time.
The SCOTUS is a soft target, easily persuaded by blackmail or threats at their personal residences.
from my profile page:
CRIMINAL CHARGE LIMITATION
In federal prosecution practice, the charging document would have to certify that the person is not being charged with more charges than deserve a sentence meriting imprisonment exceeding the person’s life expectancy by IRS IRA distribution standards when one of those charges is excluded from sentencing time consideration.
NOTE: This would be to prevent a defendant such as Donald Trump from being overcharged, to prevent federal juries from getting confused by excessive evidence and charges, and to enable federal courts to provide speedy trials and swift justice.
Perhaps if a justice is assassinated the Constitution should permit the person who nominated the dead justice should be able to pick the replacement.
“Democrats and left-leaning media appear to be mounting an all-out assault against the judicial branch, casting doubt on its legitimacy and impartiality”
NYC leftist judges excepted
Earl Warren had help doing that.
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.