Is the Supreme Court gaslighting us?
American Thinker,
by
John Green
Original Article
Posted By: Magnante,
7/1/2021 3:56:01 AM
George Washington University Law School Professor Jonathon Turley has posited that recent unanimous Supreme Court rulings may be the court sending a message to politicians. (snip) The reality is that the court is in trouble. It is no longer trusted to be unbiased. The justices are belatedly learning that a referee who isn’t faithful to the rules also lacks the authority to control the game -- as that authority is granted by the players. The justices find themselves in a predicament that was created by themselves and their predecessors. (snip) Had we stayed out of the world of penumbras and emanations, most rulings would have been unanimous.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
chumley 7/1/2021 4:12:18 AM (No. 832079)
SC justice should be the easiest job in the world. Either it is in the Constitution or it isn't. It is either prohibited or not. Instead, they decided to add their own pet biases and rely heavily on "precedent", which only multiplies errors. They also invented the concept of scrutiny levels, which are nowhere in the Constitution. In any just country the entire constitution would be strict scrutiny.
30 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
OBX Pete 7/1/2021 4:41:50 AM (No. 832084)
They should now be known as the "SUPINE COURT". A crooked bunch of nine who are helping in the destruction of America by their inaction..
28 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
terrywhite 7/1/2021 5:06:59 AM (No. 832096)
I have often wondered why there weren't more unanimous or near-unanimous decisions. It seems to me if the justices are reading from the same Constitution and looking at the same laws, then it only seems natural that they would come to a similar decision. It seems to me it would be really odd to come to some of the 5-4 decisions if all are following the law and comparing it to what the Consitution provides. The only conclusion one can come to for these close, split results is that their determinations are arrived at due to their own personal biases and not the law and Constitution.
56 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
OBX Pete 7/1/2021 5:08:41 AM (No. 832098)
Add.....Their refusal to even hear the voter fraud case was a silent decision in favor of of the ones who committed the crimes'
70 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 7/1/2021 6:56:21 AM (No. 832151)
A majority of the Court has been cowed.
32 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
F15 Gork 7/1/2021 7:45:30 AM (No. 832216)
What did Trump get for all the trouble he went to? A knife in the back and a woke Anti-Constitutional Court.
36 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
montwoodcliff 7/1/2021 8:42:45 AM (No. 832273)
I made this comment three days ago that the Court was acting to prevent packing. Creative decisions go back to the Warren Court. Eisenhower said that appointing Earl Warren was “the worst damn mistake I ever made!” And Justice William O. Douglas came up with the “penumbras and emanations” BS. In the end, I don’t believe there will be any court packing or term limits on judges and they’ll go back to their old ways of 5-4 decisions once the heat is off.
8 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
bpl40 7/1/2021 8:44:10 AM (No. 832274)
There is a very simple way out of the Court's predicament. it is called honesty. You don't need to go to Law School for that. You learn it at your mother's knee.
17 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
udanja99 7/1/2021 9:01:58 AM (No. 832299)
I blame Roberts for all of it. If he has been, as we suspect, being blackmailed, he should have resigned years ago.
28 people like this.
Eagles don't fly in flocks. These justices were intended to be independent thinkers, not group thinkers.
Following the lead of John Roberts has led to their demise.
12 people like this.
Consider this from AOC, who challenged the role of the court in overturning laws. She questioned "just, functionally, the idea that nine people, that a nine person court, can overturn laws that thousand – hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocates and policymakers drew consensus on."
Imagine a nation where there was no Constitutional arbiter, just the will of the people. Segregation, for example, would be a legal practice. Just another example of AOC's vacuousness, to represent the vacuousness of her Bronx/Queens NY constituency.
8 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Italiano 7/1/2021 9:54:00 AM (No. 832381)
SCOTUS has been a joke for decades.
9 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Strike3 7/1/2021 10:14:06 AM (No. 832413)
The Supremes removed themselves from the concept that the Constitution has the final word and jumped into lawless chaos all by themselves. At this point the government could run the same way without them, dishonestly, partisan, and destructive to America. I would bet that John Roberts now wishes that he had never boarded the Lolita Express. Just like the Mafia, you help them out once and the demands keep growing.
11 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
usawatcher 7/1/2021 11:34:56 AM (No. 832520)
Just because you may not like the decision handed down by the SC doesn’t mean they are wrong. I posit that the SC has gotten more decisions relight than wrong. The system has worked pretty well for 245 years. Nothing is perfect but our system has done pretty well for this country and it’s people.
1 person likes this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
mc squared 7/1/2021 11:35:12 AM (No. 832522)
They're also making up laws on the fly. Calling Obamacare a tax when that administration was specifically NOT calling it one, as only Congress can levy taxes.
6 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Magnante"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)