When the Supreme Court ruled that killing babies was a State issue, not Federal, the Left went crazy and introduced proposals to pack the court—to over turn the Dobbs decision. When the court recently ruled that Biden had the right to violate Federal law and pack this nation with criminals from foreign nations, the Left cheered.
Now the court has ruled that discrimination is unconstitutional, the Democrat Party, defenders of slavery, creators of Jim Crow laws, screamed that the Court needs to be packed—so we can go back to the days of discrimination and government sanctioned race hatred.
Here is an idea: In 2025, when we have a GOP President, lets pack the court with six more people—then we can over turn every socialist, Marxist, crazy law ever passed by the Democrats. Since Schumer and Schiff want Court packing, lets do it when we have full control of the White House, Senate and Congress.
Court Packing repeats itself by Richard Eber
Richard Eber, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views 7/6/23 www.capoliticalreview.com
Back in 1937 President Franklin Roosevelt (FDR), was one unhappy guy. He was completely frustrated with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) striking down key parts of his New Deal, passed by Congress. This included The National Recovery Act, mandated minimum wages, and part of social security legislation.
To remedy his problem with the “Four Horsemen” conservative Justices, the President asked Congress to add additional judges to the court. FDR also wanted to mandate compulsory retirement for appointees who had served over ten years and had reached the age of 70 and one half.
Roosevelt’s plans met stiff opposition from Congress and were roundly rejected. Eventually, after winning 4 terms in office, he was able to appoint 8 new justices causing SCOTUS decisions to be decided more his way.
86 years later, a movement to increase the number of judges appointed to the high Court, is alive once again. This time a frustrated Joe Biden and his Progressive allies are screaming unfair discrimination by (SCOTUS); principally against African Americans and the LBGTQ Community.
What they call racism, prejudice, and non-inclusion, has been seen differently by the Supreme Court. The majority opinion rulings deemed government and Leftist institutions to be guilty of un-constitutional reverse discrimination against most Americans.
This is In stark contrast to President Roosevelts beefs against the Supreme Court in the 1930’s. Last weeks rulings involved:
Student debt forgiveness In a 6-3 opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court ruled that the Biden administration’s student-debt forgiveness plan does not comply with Constitutional law of the separation of the Executive, and Legislative branches of government. Roberts argued Congress did not authorize the Secretary of Education the authority to give borrowers such significant relief. The decision of 400 billion debt forgiveness was the responsibility of Congress. It’s implementation did not belong in the Executive Branch.
Even Nancy Pelosi ,while Majority Leader, agreed with this interpretation. This did not appease many Progressive Democrats. They argued that because of racial discrimination against African Americans, they proportionately accrued a higher amount of loan obligations. than other races.
These Leftist ideologues did not consider, those who paid off their students loans, often using personal IRA funds and second mortgages. This group did not receive compensation other than minor tax breaks, Why should they be not be the recipients of Uncle Sam’s generosity as well?
College admission standards: By the same 6-3 vote, the justices rejected the race-conscious admissions policies used by Harvard and the University of North Carolina. They found the programs violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. It was ruled so called affirmative action standards academic institutions used to determine admission, in effect amount to reverse discrimination.
The majority went on to say that the color of ones skin should not be the major determining factor for being accepted into a given school. SCOTUS sided with a group of Asian students who complained about being rejected for admission based on their skin pigmentation.
Refusal to do business with LBGQT clients: According to the Court’s ruling, if religious beliefs preclude a company from setting up a gay marriage web site, they should not be forced to do so. The same Supreme Court recently rejected discrimination against Gay employees. They decided 1st Amendment rights protected companies from being forced to perform services against their will.
In reality this case should have had no legal proceedings occurring. Who in their right mind would care to do business with an entity that was prejudiced against them? Why would a gay couple want to hire the services of a homophobe or an African American be securing the services of the Klu Klux Klan to be their bodyguards?
As Mr. Spook of Star Trek fame concluded “This is not logical”.
Somewhere along the line, human nature needs to be taken into account. As Democratic rebukes to the recent rulings indicate, the Left has rejected such arguments. They havetaken an inflexible “stay off my lawn” attitude on today’s social issues.
It would appear this is a preview of coming attractions for the 2024 Presidential campaign. Democratic leaders Henny Penny, “The Ski is falling” tantrums are largely unfounded. SCOTUS’s recent rulings do not represent the end of the world or even honorable mention.
Instead of dealing with inflation, rising crime, lowered k1-12 education performance immigration, and foreign policy, the Donkeys have other plans,
They are out of touch with the majority of the electorate on bread and butter issues. As such it is their strategy to pull the wool over voters eyes. Progressives plan to use abortion rights, racial discrimination, White Privilege, College and loan forgiveness, as the foundation of their Presidential campaign.
It doesn’t matter that if their arguments do not affect most people’s lives as much as the expense to fill-up the family car.
As an example, gun control is a hot button issue with liberals. It matters not the vast majority of gun killings take place in Democratically governed big cities such as Chicago, St. Louis, Baltimore, and Los Angeles, utilizing illegal weapons.
One thing that is unlikely to change is the composition of the Supreme Court. No matter who oversees Congress, it is unlikely the number of justices in the Supreme Court will be altered.
As in the New Deal days of Franklin Roosevelt, whomever wins the White House in 2024, will likely determine the composition of SCOTUS for the rest of the 2030’s.
Until then liberal Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, can be counted on to write important dissenting opinions of majority decisions.
Ironically, those who espouse unending hatred for Trump appointees, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, have no desire to impeach them when decisions go their way. The Justices ruled 9-0 in favor of a evangelical Christian postal worker, who objected to be forced to work on the Sunday Sabbath. This was met with a collective yawn.
So it goes with SCOTUS. Whatever decisions they make, are sure to garner criticism. This is why judges receive lifetime appointments to shield them from the likes of FDR and Joe Biden
