America’s Ayatollahs

[PoliticalChic]

America’s Founders recognized that the enemy of liberty was unchecked power.


“They rejected a line of thought that stretches from Plato’s Republic through Rousseau’s social contract to any number of modern ideologies that men- the right men, disinterested men- could be trusted with unchecked power.”
Jonah Goldberg, “Suicide of the West: How the Rebirth of Tribalism, Populism, Nationalism, and Identity Politics is Destroying American Democracy,”p.165


Yet by dint of will power and a desire to corrupt…unchained power forced itself in: the judiciary.

Judges….better terms would be ‘tyrants,’ or even ‘pirates’…or, better still, ‘hijackers.’ Who gave judges, Justices, the powers they claim today?

No one.

And certainly not the Constitution.



1.The glaring, and momentous, mistake on the part of the Founders, was the Judicial (Supreme Court and lower Courts) Branch of the government.
Before any excuse for the error is mounted , it should be noted that the Constitution does not provide for what is called ‘judicial review,’ nor is the concept found in English law.


2.“If the framers—the authors and, most important, the ratifiers of the Constitution—had decided to grant the power, one would expect to see it, like the analogous presidential veto power, not only plainly stated but limited by giving conditions for its exercise and by making clear provision for Congress to have the last word. It appears that the framers mistakenly envisioned the power as involving merely the application of clear rules to disallow clear violations, something that in fact rarely occurs.” Professor Lino Graglia, https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/0817946020_1.pdf




3. A series of essays, written under the name ‘Brutus,’ warned of exactly the situation we find ourselves in today:

“…they have made the judges independent, in the fullest sense of the word. There is no power above them, to controul any of their decisions. There is no authority that can remove them, and they cannot be controuled by the laws of the legislature. In short, they are independent of the people, of the legislature, and of every power under heaven. Men placed in this situation will generally soon feel themselves independent of heaven itself.”
Brutus, March 20, 1788
http://www.constitution.org/afp/brutus15.htm




4. Is there a reason to believe that this independent, self-authorized department of government, the Judiciary, is a problem….even a danger to America?

You betcha’!!!!

The elites, the judges, claim to know better as to what our values, attitudes, and institutions should be.

“Today, however, for a variety of reasons, they—particularly academics—often see it as part of their function to maintain an adversary relationship with their society, to challenge its values and assumptions, and to lead it to the acceptance of newer and presumably better values.”
David Brooks, “Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There.”




I didn’t vote for them……and I am more than capable of determining my own values and attitudes.

How about you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

5. They, the Founders, knew that human nature includes greed, and they knew that power was one of the desires.
They tried to divide power up, and, in fact that was the promise of federalism.


The Constitution is the only set of laws that the people of this nation have agreed to be governed by. But the Founders knew that, by man's nature, aggrandizement would always be sought; no where was this more evident than in the judiciary.



Remember, the original conception for our government was federalism, "... a system of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and constituent political units (such as states or provinces).
Federalism is a system based upon democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and provincial/state governments,..." Federalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The understanding of the colonies that ratified the Constitution was one in which they retained a degree of sovereignty.






6. But, in 1793, the Supreme Court claimed jurisdiction over a sovereign state (Chisholm v. Georgia).

The court claimed that the preamble referred to the desires "to establish justice" and "to ensure domestic tranquility," and this gave the court the right to resolve any disputes. Justice Wilson went right for the throat: "To the Constitution of the United States the term SOVEREIGN, is totally unknown."
Chisholm v. Georgia | Natural Law, Natural Rights, and American Constitutionalism


This was not what the Federalists had argued when the Constitution was being debated.



Judges should never have been allowed to decide the issue of the power of judges.

 

[abrere]

they shouldn't serve for life, either. in the 1800's, life meant 60 years old, at most and few made it to the federal courts before age 40, or the supremes before age 50. Now these pos's get to rule over us for 40 years at a time. they need a 10 year term limit (at most) any judge, at any level.

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. Perhaps impossible to have been predicted at the time of ratification, the gulf between the people of American, and the elites, especially those who have become judges and Justices, has grown exponentially over time.

“Today's ruling class was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and hab..its. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints.

…our ruling class recruits and renews itself not through meritocracy but rather by taking into itself people whose most prominent feature is their commitment to fit in.

Its first tenet is that "we" are the best and brightest while the rest of Americans are retrograde, racist, and dysfunctional unless properly constrained. How did this replace the Founding generation's paradigm that "all men are created equal"? “
Angelo M. Codevilla, Angelo Codevilla, Conor Friedersdorf and the Straussian Time-Warp





8. “The tendency of elite domination, moreover, is to press America ever more steadily towards the cultural left.

The complaint here is not that old virtues are eroding and new values rising. Morality inevitably evolves….What is objectionable is that, in too many instances, a natural evolution of the moral balance is blocked and a minority morality forced upon us by judicial decrees.”
Robert Bork, “A Country I Do Not Recognize: The Legal Assault on American Values,” xi



a. "We Americans are heading into a 'crisis of foundations' of our own right now. Our judicial elites, with politicians and pundits close behind, are already at work deconstructing our most fundamental institutions — marriage, the family, religion, equality under the law."
Column on the human sciences

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. As Lord Acton prophesied, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

And nowhere is that more evident than in the evolution of judicial overreach.




“The power to assert that the Constitution prohibits any policy choice of which they disapprove has enabled the justices to make themselves the final lawmakers on any public policy issue that they choose to remove from the ordinary political process and to assign for decision to themselves.

…the Court now performs in the American system of government a role similar to that performed by the Grand Council of Ayatollahs in the Iranian system: voting takes place and representatives of the people are elected as lawmakers, but the decisions they reach on basic issues of social policy are permitted to prevail only so long as they are not disallowed by the system’s highest authority. The major difference is that the ayatollahs act as a conservative force, while the effect of the Supreme Court’s interventions is almost always—as on every one of the issues just mentioned—to challenge, reverse, and overthrow traditional American practices and values.” Professor Lino Graglia https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/0817946020_1.pdf



This nation is not a judicial theocracy.
What is needed is a strong President who will look upon the courts, and tell them 'this is America, we are governed by the Constitution.....not by you.
Your decisions will be viewed as suggestions, to be reviewed by elected officials."

The people of America deserve no less.

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. There are the American people, and then there are the cultural Marxists, the elites, exercising their tyrannical oppression.


“On one side of this “culture war” is the majority of the American people, largely committed to traditional American values, practices, and institutions. On the other side is what might be called the “knowledge” or “verbal” class or “cultural elite,” consisting primarily of academics, most importantly at elite schools, and their progeny in the media, mainline churches, and generally, the verbal or literary occupations—people whose only tools and products are words.

At one time the most educated and successful members of a society could be expected to be its strongest defenders. Today, however, for a variety of reasons, they—particularly academics—often see it as part of their function to maintain an adversary relationship with their society, to challenge its values and assumptions, and to lead it to the acceptance of newer and presumably better values.

The justices of the Supreme Court, usually products of elite schools, especially law schools, are themselves members of this cultural class.”
Professor Lino Graglia https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/0817946020_1.pdf




The courts and judges are the modern day Simon Legrees, and the American people....slaves.

 

[PoliticalChic]

11. “The Supreme Court’s vindicated President Trump’s decision to suspend entry into the United States of individuals from eight countries, reversing lower courts in a case brought by Hawaii. The vote was five to four, with the Chief Justice writing a forceful opinion that on this head Congress has exuded deference to the president.” Supreme Court Backs Trump On Travel Ban




Now….where is the penalty, so richly deserved, for these Liberal activists who masquerade as jurists??????

Everyone....EVERYONE knew that the prerogative was presidential.

Yet....they ignored the text of the Constitution.....they should be booted off the bench.




Yesterday, "Legal Insurrection" predicted this outcome...

"The fact that SCOTUS on multiple occasions has stayed lower court injunctions as to Travel Order No. 2 and No. 3 demonstrates that the Justices are uncomfortable with (a) the judiciary usurping Executive Branch power over immigration and national security, and (b) single district court judges issuing national injunctions to do so.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will rein in the Resistance Judges."
Getting ready for SCOTUS ruling on the not-Travel Ban, not-Muslim Ban, Travel Order No. 3


And, they did.



Now....where is the punishment due these Liberal ayatollahs?????????