The cure for the evils of democracy is more democracy!
H. L. Mencken, Notes on Democracy, 1926
The founders and the framers continue to demonstrate their insight into the creation of their experiment in self-government and the rules by which the nation would function.
They created three equal branches of the United States government - the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judiciary. Their plan worked along the lines that if the executive – the President, or Legislative – the Congress, tried to pull a political power coup, the Judiciary – the Supreme Court – would be the deciding vote and referee in all governmental branch disputes.
Until the last decade or so, the structure worked as intended. The political left has been trying to pervert the process in far too many ways as of late.
To wit:
When the left tries to pull a constitutional fast one, they seem confident that the liberal justices are rubber stamp votes for creating legislation from the bench, in violation of the Constitution. The corrupt media then begin the onslaught of wondering which of the conservative jurists will exhibit ‘bravery’ and vote with the liberals.
We find it amusing and terrifying that there is never a question of any liberal jurist demonstrating similar bravery and voting with the conservatives. Among the political idio-crats, bravery only works one way.
The Constitution provides for a lifetime appointment. This has had the occasional series of complaints throughout our history, but nothing of consequence.
In the last few years, the imbeciles of the political extreme left, in the face of Supreme Court losses, have not only demanded term limits for jurists, but to pack the court with a sufficient number of liberal jurists to overcome the current conservative majority.
They apparently no longer believe in bravery and have decided to instead count on strength in numbers. We have written previously how in the ruling on Covid mandates, each of the three liberal Supreme Court judges got major facts on the case wildly wrong, and instead voted along political policy lines. In the scheme to subvert the Constitution, they are attempting to impune the historical impartiality og the Court, trying to create it in their own warped image.
America deserves better than a funhouse mirror image of justice.
This week, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson will begin her Senate confirmation hearings. Some have attempted to claim she would be the most significant apppointment since John Marshall. Other will claim she must not be allowed in traffic court, let alone the highest court in the land.
We will not engage in such political sport.
Joe Biden has already diminished her by stating he would appoint a woman of color to the bench. No matter her qualifications, she will be forever tarnished with the epithet she was picked solely for her gender and skin pigment attributes.
The Madison Conservative will ignore all of the political noise and focus on a single question, which we believe, would set the predicate for the rest of her hearing.
A single interrogative that to our knowledge has never been asked of a Supreme Court nominee.
The Supreme Court decides issues of constitutionality, if any law or act is allowed under our founding document.
We have our own opinions on the answer, but will wait until after the hearings to discuss it in this forum.
We would ask our readers to consider the question, decide their answer, and see if their elected representative gets with a country mile of asking it for the constituents.
To wit:
“Madame Justice,
You will be deciding issues relative to the United Stses Constitution.
In your legal opinion, to whom does the Constitution apply? Do its rights extend to people who broke our laws to enter the country? There are numerous issues affecting this country. Who do you see having a legitimate claim to the rights and responsibilities of the Constitution?”
We would be fascinated with her response.
No comments:
Post a Comment