Judicial Politics (surprise!)

“A Rhode Island US District Judge has indefinitely blocked President Trump’s freeze on federal grants and loans, arguing in his ruling that the White House had “put itself above Congress” and undermined democracy.”

This gratuitous comment about “democracy” is hardly evidence of impartial (as opposed to political) judicial temperament. It is also laughable, especially in light of the mountain of extra-democratic radical leftist policies which have become the a’law of the land” over recent decades - with zero judicial resistance or even comment. It is a central reason for the failure of governance under which we are falling apart.

Was it “democracy” which led to the litany of taxpayer dollars corruptly wasted overseas, like those Trump recounted Tuesday night? Are decades of usurpation by the deep state supposed to be normal “democracy”? Where was judicial scrutiny of the nature of “our democracy” when all the things Trump is dismantling were enacted? It’s not like there was no obvious pattern.

These recurring carefully-orchestrated judge-shopped judicial usurpations - nationwide injunctions by district judges who prima facie lack jurisdiction beyond their own districts - must stop if Trump’s actions are to be effective. It is not exactly democracy at work, is it? I’m beginning to think the only way to force the “Supreme Court” to deal with this glaring issue (lest Trump’s term end before they deal with it) is for Trump to IGNORE all these injunctions and precipitate a “Constitutional crisis”. It might also be salutary as a result of its possibly terminal effect upon those severely afflicted with TDS. An entire psych ward of them were visible in the House chamber Tuesday night.

3 Likes

I like the “He has made his decision; now let him enforce it” approach. Irish democracy! Though maybe nowadays we should call it Ukrainian democracy.

1 Like

I neglected to mention that the three branches are CO-equal, and each may decide independently what the Constitution says and what democracy means. The judicial branch is not superior, especially when inferior courts bootstrap their jurisdiction under mere color of law. Any President - here one who is attempting to reverse decades of legislative malfeasance and corrupt administrative usurpations - can and should reassert the power of the people.

The Presidency is, after all, the only nationally elected office. Its democratic character is far superior, de facto and de jure, to any appointed judge. Who does an Obama judge think he is to lecture on the nature of democracy? That’s the hallmark of a democrat (sic) - saying one noble thing while taking the basest, most corrupt actions possible.

3 Likes