Ted Cruz Has A Plan to Fight Judicial Tyranny – And Here It Is

The Political Insider ^ | Rusty Weiss

[SoConPubbie]

Never has it been more evident that America needs a strong Constitutional conservative in the White House to help negate the last two terms of a radical left-wing President, the last six years of Republicans who bow down to Obama’s every whim, and now against a Supreme Court engaged in judicial tyranny.

Last week was a devastating blow for conservatives, but worse, it was a devastating blow to the Constitution, our Founding Fathers, and America in general.

Presidential candidate, Ted Cruz, put it in no uncertain terms – the Supreme Court rulings on Obamacare and same-sex marriage were “some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history.”

Via the Daily Caller (HT Gateway Pundit):

Continuing his critique of the Supreme Court’s recent decisions on Obamacare and same-sex marriage, Sen. Ted Cruz said Friday that the rulings mark “some of the darkest 24 hours in our nations history.”

Cruz made the comments in an interview on Sean Hannity’s radio show Friday afternoon.

“Today is some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history,” Cruz said.

“I couldn’t say it more eloquently,” Hannity responded.

“Yesterday and today were both naked and shameless judicial activism,” Cruz said. “Neither decision — the decision yesterday rewriting Obamacare for the second time. Six justices joined the Obama administration. You now have President Obama, Kathleen Sebelius and six justices responsible for forcing this failed disaster of a law on millions of Americans, and simply rewriting the law in a way that is fundamentally contrary to their judicial oaths.”

“And then today, this radical decision purporting to strike down the marriage laws of every state. It has no connection to the United States Constitution. They are simply making it up,” Cruz said. “It is lawless, and in doing so, they have undermined the fundamentally legitimacy of the United States Supreme Court.”

Anybody who knows Cruz knows he isn’t your typical RINO Republican, all talk and no action. After the Obamacare ruling was handed down, Cruz took to the chamber floor and blasted the “rogue justices” of the Supreme Court for upholding the policies of a “lawless” administration, adding that they too, had become “lawless.”

After declaring that justices who engage in activism should “resign and run for office,” Cruz is offering up a plan to make it happen – judicial elections.

In a column for the National Review, Cruz said “enough is enough.”

Judicial retention elections have worked in states across America; they will work for America. In order to provide the people themselves with a constitutional remedy to the problem of judicial activism and the means for throwing off judicial tyrants, I am proposing an amendment to the United States Constitution that would subject the justices of the Supreme Court to periodic judicial-retention elections. Every justice, beginning with the second national election after his or her appointment, will answer to the American people and the states in a retention election every eight years. Those justices deemed unfit for retention by both a majority of the American people as a whole and by majorities of the electorates in at least half of the 50 states will be removed from office and disqualified from future service on the Court.

Cruz warned that if Congress is unwilling to correct this lawlessness, “the movement from the people for an Article V Convention of the States — to propose the amendments directly — will grow stronger and stronger.”

Watchdog explains what that means:

If enough states act, a convention would be one means for reformers to rein in the reach of the federal government. Because the U.S. Constitution provides a means to hold one, doing so could help return the country to its roots of limited federal powers.

It’s clear from this past week that the country needs a strong conservative as President – to fight back against an out-of-control government ushered in under Obama.

Is Cruz that man? He’s sure acting like it.

[SoConPubbie]

"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton "We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all." -- President Ronald Reagan "A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine 1792 "It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." - Samuel Adams "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

[SoConPubbie]

    Ted Cruz Ping!

    If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
    Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!

    CRUZ or LOSE!

[Buckeye McFrog]

It could just allow the Twittermobs to unseat Thomas and Scalia.

[xzins]

He did well on Hannity. I donated to him again afterwards. It’s been obvious for decades that the supreme court judges are political creatures. As many have said, there was zero doubt what the 4 liberal judges would decide.

[snarkpup]

One thing the Framers of the Constitution were deathly afraid of was one faction controlling all branches of government simultaneously. For this reason, they set things up so that the officials in these branches were selected by very different means and for very different terms of office.

Cruz' plan does the opposite. It will make the Supreme Court sync up more closely with the other branches of government that are themselves more closely synched with the whims of the masses.

[entropy12]

The best plan ever, to reduce judicial tyranny in future, is to defeat Hillary in 2016. If Obama lost in 2008, we would not have Kagan & Sotomayor ruling on same sex marriages. A split republican party is the pathway to more judicial tyranny for next 50 years at a minimum.

[SoConPubbie]

The best plan ever, to reduce judicial tyranny in future, is to defeat Hillary in 2016. If Obama lost in 2008, we would not have Kagan & Sotomayor ruling on same sex marriages. A split republican party is the pathway to more judicial tyranny for next 50 years at a minimum.

Ted is proposing a constitutional remedy.

It is the best plan.

[mountainbunny]

The Founders could have required retention, but did not.

If you think the court is political now, just imagine what it would be like if judges had to pander for votes.

It would be a disaster.

Again, the wisdom of the Founders is timeless. I support Ted Cruz, but this is silly and not at all worthy of him.

[DannyTN]

"Cruz' plan does the opposite. It will make the Supreme Court sync up more closely with the other branches of government that are themselves more closely synched with the whims of the masses."

I agree. There is a danger there. But what's the alternative? We've had the worse case for some time now. A court that unilaterally decides to refuse to protect unborn life, and now redefines marriage.

One alternative is to have congress start impeaching. That would be easier than a Cruz's amendment. But long term the retention vote might be easier than an impeachment vote.

[SoConPubbie]

Except that his plan makes it 8 years. And apparently, even though, as you commented, the Framers tried to make it so one faction did not control all branches of the government, they do that today, even with their system in place.

We need to do something different. Lifetime appointments don't appear to be working as the current Supreme Court proves.

Cruz's approach will give the electorate more control over this problem. It is needed. Now!

[SoConPubbie]

One thing the Framers of the Constitution were deathly afraid of was one faction controlling all branches of government simultaneously. For this reason, they set things up so that the officials in these branches were selected by very different means and for very different terms of office.

Except that his plan makes it 8 years. And apparently, even though, as you commented, the Framers tried to make it so one faction did not control all branches of the government, they do that today, even with their system in place.

We need to do something different. Lifetime appointments don't appear to be working as the current Supreme Court proves.

Cruz's approach will give the electorate more control over this problem. It is needed. Now!

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Because the U.S. Constitution provides a means to hold one, doing so could help return the country to its roots of limited federal powers.

Or send it over the edge.

[afsnco]

The Supreme Court is hopelessly politicized. The essentially unaccountable judiciary is the biggest mistake our Founders made. The “living” constitution scumbags, the dimmos, will always protect a judge/justice that spits all over the constitution. Impeachment and removal of judges/justices should therefore be much easier than it is. On good behavior indeed.

[SoConPubbie]

If you think the court is political now, just imagine what it would be like if judges had to pander for votes.

It can't be more political or worse than it is now.

We just had two justices, one appointed by a rock-solid conservative (Reagan) and one appointed by a Republican (GWB) legislate from the bench and pretend words don't mean what they mean to pass two laws that do not have any support in the constitution.

The men that started this country were from a different era, a different culture, where honor meant something. Where the judeo-christian foundation of our country meant something. We don't live in that era anymore.

Something has to be done, and Ted Cruz's approach is probably the best remedy, given the current culture and lack of honor, to fix the problem short of a Rebellion.

[yoe]

As stated earlier; Since the SCOTUS cannot (?) hear its self, and the gay marriage ruling is not Constitutional nor can be found in any form in that document other than supercilious reasoning ....those states whose voters voted against such a union should be able to ignore or be exempt from that false law i.e. the supreme court CANNOT legislate....that is the job of Congress. This SCOTUS has acted lawlessly...that should be enough to ignore their ruling.

Sen. Cruz is 100% correct in demanding this Congress step up to the plate and fix this mess.

We can help by contacting out congressmen/women NOW....our religious freedom hangs in the balance imho...states rights also are left hanging in the breeze by this lawless court.

[SgtHooper]

Hey, we are going down anyway. Let’s give it a shot, and if it fails, we get to become fully engaged—the sooner, the better.

[SoConPubbie]

Or send it over the edge.

We are only a few short-steps from a Rebellion. Best to try all remedies before that occurs.

[discostu]

Thus proving Ted’s a rabble rouser without a plan. For one thing you’d never get this through, for another on the off chance you did it would get overturned, and finally retention elections don’t actually work on the state level.

[SoConPubbie]

Thus proving Ted’s a rabble rouser without a plan. For one thing you’d never get this through, for another on the off chance you did it would get overturned, and finally retention elections don’t actually work on the state level.

Complete and utter B.S. on your part.

Given your "rules" the founders, those fighting the British, that rag-tag band of farmers, shop-owners, etc. who banded together to fight for their freedom against the most powerful nation on earth at the time, should have given up because they'd never win.

Given your attitude, unless it was guaranteed to be successful at the start, you would have sat on the sidelines and refused to fight because you'd be too scared to fight for fear of losing.

[Amendment10]

If the next “conservative” president isn’t willing to work with patriots to peacefully force the corrupt federal government to surrender 10th Amendment-protected state powers that the feds have been stealing from the states since before the ink on the Constitution had dried back to the states, then it’s only a matter of time before the country has another president as lawless as Obama.