Nothing is more threatening to progressive projects than a Supreme Court that abides by the Constitution. It really is that simple.
This is the reason for the tantrum against Judge Amy Koney Barrett’s confirmation. Those Democrats who believe that the resolution of judicial disputes has been shelved and now threaten to undermine the separation of powers through a plan of retaliation to undermine the Supreme Court is simply sticking to procedures or etiquette.
On the one hand, Barrett’s confirmation did not cancel any regulations. If the Democrats win a majority in the Senate in 2016, Merrick Garland will be implicated in the Supreme Court, general election or not holding a general election. Now, many Democrats who are also angry at Barrett’s confirmation, including Joe Biden, argue at the time that voting in the Senate is a constitutional obligation. Our current constitution clearly provides conflicting directions from one election to the next.
If Trump nominates Garland to succeed Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Ruth Bader Ginsburg), the Democrats will have no problem putting him in court-even on November 2. The behavior of liberals seems to be full of theological rights, not only to prescribe conditions, but to prescribe conditions. The nominees of the hearing, whether they win or lose the election.
When you feel that the system exists only to promote your guerrilla party agenda, it seems to “collapse”
If the Democratic Party regains the presidency in 2020, the opposition will no longer “resist” but will become a “blocker.” The obstructors will need to be repaired again. The media will again focus on the issue of “stalemate”. The trajectory of history has been bent, and everything else is just an obstacle.
For nearly 40 years, the left has relied on judges appointed by the Republican Party to intimidate the same brand. Before Barrett’s vote, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer declared, “This will be one of the darkest days in the 231-year history of the U.S. Senate.”
To be fair, Shu said that the resolution against Trump’s removal earlier this year was also “one of the darkest moments in the history of the Senate”, and the passage of the calm Republican tax cut plan was also “one of the darkest moments”. One”. . . This historic day in the Senate. “So basically, any time Chuck Schumer loses is the darkest day in history.
However, once Barrett’s confirmation became a reality, the Democrats began to turn to the real problem. Primitivism is the foundation of progressivism.
This crusade has instigators who incite idiots. The former is the Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey and others, who claimed that “primitivism is racism. Primitivism is sexism. Primitivism is homophobic. Primitivism is just a fancy word for discrimination.”
The latter are the minions who refute this empty view because they lack a basic understanding of legal philosophy or civic education, including the interpretation of the “amendment.”
There is nothing to say that the radical contemporary left is fearless. Schumer warned this week: “The planet is warming. Laggard workers. The politics of black money. The reduction of options. The restrictions on voting rights. These are the results of this nomination.”
Of course, what he meant was that a dictatorial majority court might slow down progressive environmentalist policies that undermine individual freedom and local sovereignty. He said that the court may make it more difficult for Democrats to adopt policies that force workers to join and fund unions and eradicate Janus’ decision.
Now, I have no doubt that a court system will also disappoint partisan Republicans. Originalists often disagree with each other. However, this is unlikely to overturn the traditional role of the state in American life.