Schumer, the Supreme Court, and the Mob ..By Andrew C. McCarthy

[mystery-ak]

   Schumer, the Supreme Court, and the Mob
By Andrew C. McCarthy

March 5, 2020 2:39 PM

The senator treats the Court like a political body — which it is.

Should Chuck Schumer be censured? Of course he should, in the sense that the rule of law, were it actually our cynosure, would cry out for it.

On Wednesday morning, the Democrats’ Senate minority leader stirred up the mob outside the Supreme Court, unabashedly threatening Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh: “I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price,” Schumer inveighed. “You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.”

Inside, the justices were then hearing argument on what ought to be a straightforward abortion case (i.e., one in which the “right” invented in Roe v. Wade is not up for consideration). When called on his menacing remarks, rather than apologize, Schumer brazenly lied about what he had done. This morning, he was still lying — a tepid apology, offered under pressure while insisting that “in no way was I making a threat.”

In a rule-of-law society, that should rate censure. Case closed.

Except it’s not closed, because we are not a rule-of-law society. We just pretend to be. In a rule-of-law society, a mob would not gather on the steps of the courthouse in the first place.

more
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/03/schumer-the-supreme-court-and-the-mob/

[Cyber Liberty]

McCarthy makes a good point:  The SCOTUS did this to themselves when they donned the mantle of Congress and created a "right" out of thin air in Roe v Wade.  Now they are just another political institution to be cajoled and threatened by a mob.

[Bigun]

McCarthy makes a good point:  The SCOTUS did this to themselves when they donned the mantle of Congress and created a "right" out of thin air in Roe v Wade.  Now they are just another political institution to be cajoled and threatened by a mob.

It's FAR worse than that @Cyber Liberty, generations of promotion of the lie, in media and in our public schools, that the Judicial Branch, including the supreme court, is  "co-equal" to the other two branches is worse! It was widely, and completely, understood when the U.S. Constitution was ratified that the Judicial branch was not co-equal but that has been chipped away at by lawyers and "educators" for two hundred years.

The very foundation of these United States was government by the people. And, they would never have ratified a document of governance that put unelected judges on equal footing with the elected representatives of the people.

The judiciary was, and is, the weaker of the three branches by design and no one should t keep buying this "co-equal branches" LIE!

[Cyber Liberty]

It's FAR worse than that @Cyber Liberty, generations of promotion of the lie, in media and in our public schools, that the Judicial Branch, including the supreme court, is  "co-equal" to the other two branches is worse! It was widely, and completely, understood when the U.S. Constitution was ratified that the Judicial branch was not co-equal but that has been chipped away at by lawyers and "educators" for two hundred years.

The very foundation of these United States was government by the people. And, they would never have ratified a document of governance that put unelected judges on equal footing with the elected representatives of the people.

The judiciary was, and is, the weaker of the three branches by design and no one should t keep buying this "co-equal branches" LIE!

Even less understood is the fact that all Courts inferior to the SCOTUS are not creatures of the Judiciary Branch, but are in fact constructs of, and answerable to, the Legislative Branch.  And, you are correct, the Judicial Branch (which is only the SCOTUS) was intended to be the weakest leg of the stool.  Wasn't that discussed in the Federalist Papers?

[Bigun]

Even less understood is the fact that all Courts inferior to the SCOTUS are not creatures of the Judiciary Branch, but are in fact constructs of, and answerable to, the Legislative Branch.  And, you are correct, the Judicial Branch (which is only the SCOTUS) was intended to be the weakest leg of the stool.  Wasn't that discussed in the Federalist Papers?

Indeed it was! Greatly discussed but in Federalist 78 most predominately! 

https://constitution.org/fed/federa78.htm

https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/f/the-federalist/summary-and-analysis/section-xii-judiciary-federalist-no-78-hamilton

[Cyber Liberty]

Indeed it was! Greatly discussed but in Federalist 78 most predominately! 

https://constitution.org/fed/federa78.htm

https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/f/the-federalist/summary-and-analysis/section-xii-judiciary-federalist-no-78-hamilton

From the Constitution site:

This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power1; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks.

I knew I was driving my ducks to the right market when I asked you, @Bigun.   

[Bigun]

From the Constitution site:

I knew I was driving my ducks to the right market when I asked you, @Bigun.   

Thanks @Cyber Liberty!   

And BTW: You are exactly right about ALL federal courts other than SCOTUS!  Congress can do away with them tomorrow if it chooses!

[Cyber Liberty]

Thanks @Cyber Liberty!   

And BTW: You are exactly right about ALL federal courts other than SCOTUS!  Congress can do away with them tomorrow if it chooses!

Congress can also clip their wings, for example stopping inferior courts from inflicting their Judgements on people that lie outside of their Jurisdictions.  Yes, I'm talking about the "Universal Injunctions."  Congress could stop that crapola with a single vote.  They won't, though, because the courts are inflicting the pain that Congress wants inflicted. 

Courts have been doing the heavy lifting for the leftist Rats, with the tacit approval of the Republicans who have held both houses of Congress more than once in the past 30 years.

[Bigun]

Congress can also clip their wings, for example stopping inferior courts from inflicting their Judgements on people that lie outside of their Jurisdictions.  Yes, I'm talking about the "Universal Injunctions."  Congress could stop that crapola with a single vote.  They won't, though, because the courts are inflicting the pain that Congress wants inflicted. 

Courts have been doing the heavy lifting for the leftist Rats, with the tacit approval of the Republicans who have held both houses of Congress more than once in the past 30 years.

They won't because FAR too many of them are also members of the Clan of the Bar themselves!