5/15/2018
Judicial Tyranny... is it time to "Just Say NO" to "Case Law"?
One citizen's opines...
Thomas Jefferson warned if allowed, the courts court could be the undoing of the Republic!
With the mounting examples of judicial tyranny (much so far against President Trump)… is it time to “just say no” and demand that “case law” be abolished until voted on by a Congress and signed by the president? This is not new… in Marbury v. Madison (1803), Chief Justice John Marshall and the court gave themselves the authority of “Judicial Review”… a defacto VETO (used many times) of the will of the people. They “found” this authority under Article III of the Constitution, similar to how they “found” the right to an abortion in the 14th Amendment.
Thomas Jefferson warned if allowed, the courts court could be the undoing of the Republic!
With the mounting examples of judicial tyranny (much so far against President Trump)… is it time to “just say no” and demand that “case law” be abolished until voted on by a Congress and signed by the president? This is not new… in Marbury v. Madison (1803), Chief Justice John Marshall and the court gave themselves the authority of “Judicial Review”… a defacto VETO (used many times) of the will of the people. They “found” this authority under Article III of the Constitution, similar to how they “found” the right to an abortion in the 14th Amendment.
What is known as “case law”, which way too often are non(even anti)-democratic
judicial decisions that unconstitutionally (or anti-Constitutionally?) have the
weight of law.. though NEVER passed by Congress and signed by the president! (as laws are supposed to be). ALL so-called "case law" should be
suspended pending a Congressional review, legal voted passage and signed by the president.
I wonder if ever a president with the gonads (Trump?), after declaring his Administration a "Judicial Tyranny Sanctuary Zone" (ignoring despot judge’ rulings)... could (would) by executive order rescind these past rulings: Stating:
"Using the example of California and other 'Sanctuary' states and areas, I hereby will ignore not just these unconstitutional rulings, but worse anti-Constitutional rulings! The list I offer, from prayer in schools to Rowe v Wade, to illegal interfering with foreign policy will no longer be enforced by my administration, until passed as law by Congress and signed by me. I call on Congress to take their responsibility and review these rulings!”
I wonder if ever a president with the gonads (Trump?), after declaring his Administration a "Judicial Tyranny Sanctuary Zone" (ignoring despot judge’ rulings)... could (would) by executive order rescind these past rulings: Stating:
"Using the example of California and other 'Sanctuary' states and areas, I hereby will ignore not just these unconstitutional rulings, but worse anti-Constitutional rulings! The list I offer, from prayer in schools to Rowe v Wade, to illegal interfering with foreign policy will no longer be enforced by my administration, until passed as law by Congress and signed by me. I call on Congress to take their responsibility and review these rulings!”
It may be a SHTF moment… even a Constitutional crisis, but
is past due IMHO… more and more each passing year, the judicial and bureaucratic regulatory state is steadily stealing the
liberty of Americans with force of law that NO legislative body ever voted on! This is against the intent of the Founders.
A couple of suggestions to start:
End of lifetime appointments: Judges should have fixed terms (12 years?) after such time if the current president so desires, they could be re-nominated, and then must be reconfirmed for another fixed term.
Judicial review and rulings as to constitutionality would still happen... but subject to review by the other branches of government... this is sort of the case now, but cowardly Congress often acquiesces... no more: Congress must vote to support the ruling (especially so-called "Landmark" cases) for it to become permanent and have weight of law.
In any court preceding ALL participants, judges, lawyers, witnesses... would be placed under oath!
"I solemnly swear to tell {and seek} the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth." No more hiding exculpatory evidence... that would be felony perjury!
Example: If a rouge judge rules against the president on "travel bans"... Congress would have to vote to support that ban for it to stay in effect.
A couple of suggestions to start:
End of lifetime appointments: Judges should have fixed terms (12 years?) after such time if the current president so desires, they could be re-nominated, and then must be reconfirmed for another fixed term.
Judicial review and rulings as to constitutionality would still happen... but subject to review by the other branches of government... this is sort of the case now, but cowardly Congress often acquiesces... no more: Congress must vote to support the ruling (especially so-called "Landmark" cases) for it to become permanent and have weight of law.
In any court preceding ALL participants, judges, lawyers, witnesses... would be placed under oath!
"I solemnly swear to tell {and seek} the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth." No more hiding exculpatory evidence... that would be felony perjury!
Example: If a rouge judge rules against the president on "travel bans"... Congress would have to vote to support that ban for it to stay in effect.
Thomas Jefferson (Letter to A. Coray, October 31, 1823):
"At the establishment of our constitutions, the
judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of
the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to
become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for
their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their
decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded
by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by
precedent, sapping, by little and
little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by
construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless
worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not
made to be trusted for life if secured against all liability to account.”
Link to whole article:
Thomas Jefferson on the risk of Judicial Tyranny
Link to whole article:
Thomas Jefferson on the risk of Judicial Tyranny
Comments:
<< Home
Please stick to working at the manure plant and leave the practice of law to those of us with a license.
Post a Comment
<< Home
