Dems to Supreme Court: Rule the way we want or we'll destroy the court
By Pete Kaliner
August 16, 2019
Five Democratic US Senators are threatening the Supreme Court with destruction if it doesn't rule the way the Democrats want.
Don't take my word for it.
Here's the blog post at the fever swamps of leftist hacks (a/k/a: ThinkProgress):
[Sen. Sheldon] Whitehouse is one of five senators (the others are Sens. Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)) who filed a brief earlier this week in a Second Amendment case the Supreme Court’s Republican majority could use to dismantle what remains of America’s gun regulations. Whitehouse is also the lead (and only) counsel on the brief.
The brief itself is less a legal document than a declaration of war. Though parts of it argue that the high court lacks jurisdiction over this case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. City of New York, the thrust of the brief is that the Supreme Court is dominated by political hacks selected by the Federalist Society, and promoted by the National Rifle Association — and that if those hacks don’t watch out, the American people are going to rebel against them.
Here's David French at National Review:
I just finished reading of the most astonishing legal briefs I’ve ever read. It is easily the most malicious Supreme Court brief I’ve ever seen. And it comes not from an angry or unhinged private citizen, but from five Democratic members of the United States Senate. Without any foundation, they directly attack the integrity of the five Republican appointees and conclude with a threat to take political action against the Court if it doesn’t rule the way they demand.
The brief is so outside legal norms that, had I drafted it as a member of the Supreme Court bar, I’d be concerned about facing legal sanction for recklessly impugning the integrity of the Court.
At the end of the brief, the Senators implicitly threaten the Court and it's current composition:
The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be “restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.” Particularly on the urgent issue of gun control, a nation desperately needs it to heal.
Keep in mind, Democratic candidates for President are openly discussing court-packing if they can win control of the White House and Congress.
As Ted Diadium at the Cleveland Plain Dealer notes, this is a major reason why Trump won in 2016:
The 2020 election will likely determine whether the next two or three justices abide by the role assigned to them by the Constitution, or return to the liberal activism that too often marked the court’s decisions before Trump’s two nominees, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, joined the bench.
So … yes. The Supreme Court.
Pete's Prep: Friday, Aug. 16, 2019
- Byron York at the Washington Examiner writes: "Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, said recently that, after the Mueller report, the paper has to shift the focus of its coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president's alleged racism. "We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well," Baquet said. "Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story.""
- From William Jacobsen at Legal Insurrection: "Rep. Rashida Tlaib granted “humanitarian” visit to grandmother, but she rejects it." The Daily Wire has the details on the terror group the Congresswoman was planning to meet.
- Here's a press release from ICE: "U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested fugitive Oscar Pacheco-Leonardo, 33, a Honduran national, and repeat immigration violator during a targeted enforcement operation in Mecklenburg County August 9, nearly two months after the Mecklenburg County Sheriff’s Office refused to honor an ICE detainer, or even notify ICE of the release, and instead released Mr. Pacheco’s from local criminal custody following his arrest on first-degree rape and indecent liberties with a minor charges."