Dem Reactions to SCOTUS Kneecapping Activist Judges Are Delicious
Top O' the Briefing
Happy Monday, dear Kruiser Morning Briefing friends. Alzzubumwya was convinced that there was no greater portent of mankind's doom than flavored Oreos.
Before we get into the main topic today, I just want to do an endzone dance over the news that backstabbing squish Thom Tillis will not be seeking reelection, which Matt wrote about. Regular readers of mine know that I've gone after Tillis on a few occasions. Matt's post quotes Tillis' lament of the "endangered species" status of bipartisanship. Here are some of my thoughts on that which I used to begin a column I wrote about Tillis in December of 2022:
One of the more frustrating aspects of being a conservative Republican is the constant need to look over one’s shoulder for stealth attacks by moderate squish members of the GOP on important issues like health care, gun control, and amnesty for illegal immigrants. Such ideological shivs in the back always arrive under the execrable guise of bipartisanship.
The Democratic Party has gone so far off the rails that there is no case to be made for seeking common ground with them. Props to President Trump for giving Tillis the hook. As my friend and HotAir colleague John Sexton wrote, Trump had a great week.
Now for today's feature presentation...
The Supreme Court of the United States made sure that last Friday was not the slow news day that Fridays typically are. The justices were once again pressed into duty because of the antics of the chronic sufferers of Trump Derangement Syndrome. They almost certainly have better things to do, but it was time for the Judicial Branch to police itself.
The Supreme Court has ruled in a case involving whether district court judges have jurisdiction to issue nationwide injunctions regarding President Donald Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship. The court ruled 6-3 in favor of the Trump administration. The conservative justices ruled for the administration, while the liberals ruled against.
"The court says that universal injunctions 'likely exceed the equitable authority that Congress has granted to federal courts,'" explained SCOTUSblog’s Amy Howe on a liveblog on Friday.
As my friend and RedState colleague Susie Moore explains, Trump v. CASA is comprised of “three consolidated cases involving President Trump's executive order regarding birthright citizenship, with the issue being not the substance of the order itself (we're not there yet), but rather, whether the district court judges who issued injunctive relief in the cases had the jurisdiction to issued nationwide/universal injunctions prohibiting the administration from implementing the order anywhere in the country.”
SCOTUS decided that liberal lunatic lower court judges can't just throw their commie whims into the machinery of real justice because ORANGE MAN BAD, thwarting the Democrats' pathetic tantrum-based way of doing things, at least for the moment.
Because their championing of illegal alien criminals isn't popular with real Americans, Democrats have been relying on rogue judges to keep rapists, murderers, and human traffickers in the United States. They do love their criminals. As we have seen all too often in the last few years, the American judiciary has a lot of judges who are willing to pervert the law when battling President Trump.
The response from the Dems and their flying monkeys in the mainstream media is redefining "unhinged." And an absolute delight to watch unfold. David wrote a VIP column about the response from The Chicago Tribune:
The Tribune's coverage frames the ruling as an “invitation for executive abuse” and wrings its hands over what could happen to birthright citizenship, Trump’s latest target. They suggest that this ruling will create a patchwork of justice, resulting in different Americans experiencing varying legal realities.
Here’s what they really mean: “We can’t stop Trump anymore, and that terrifies us.”
Every iteration of this diaper-soiling that I've seen in the MSM involves fantastical musings about what President Trump might do. It is just more of the "monster under the bed" nonsense we have been subjected to since 2016. It's childish behavior, because only children are afraid of monsters under the bed.
The standard-bearer for the mentally unwell in this case is none other than Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who wrote a dissenting opinion that will forever be a stain of shame on the highest court in the land. In Jackson's fever dream, reining in the lower court judges means that President Trump can now operate in a Wild West scenario, doing whatever he wants because the law no longer applies to him, or something. Her liberal colleagues on the court didn't even sign off on it.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett absolutely obliterated the dissent, writing for the majority that Jackson's dissent, "is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself (emphasis mine)." Matt has more about that here.
The Democrats fear an abuse of power by President Trump because abusing power is what they do. They can't fathom that everyone doesn't do it. The beauty of this is that, even though the president isn't going to become what they say he is, they'll still be getting ulcers worrying about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment