Constitutional judges and squishy judges

Thomas Jefferson –rightly so– said he thought the “judicial branch” was the most dangerous, which they right away proved to be so with Marbury v Madison. Later SCOTUS rulings have overturned precedent but never that one, but overall, it has given itself even administrative (executive) and legislative powers. Like setting up an oversight function that continues to this day supposedly having to block the states from racial discrimination.

Congress at any time could have ruled that constitutionality was outside federal court jurisdiction. Or abortion, or marriage between two persons of the same sex, or transgender bathrooms, any of that.

But creatures of Congress are compromised by the same things the executive is, like money, wealth, power; well, say it, lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, and in many real-world cases, fear of man.

SCOTUS is vulnerable to at least power (the pride of life), and in my humble opinion, in some cases, fear of man. We don’t know what Obama said to John Roberts in the private telephone call in the lead-up to the infamous Unaffordable Care Act decision, just like we don’t know really what Obama said to Rep. Bart Stupak, the leader of the caucus of pro-life Democrats in the House, to get him to capitulate. Stupak must have known Obama was outright lying when he said it would not pay for abortion or abortifacients.

But then Antonin Scalia was found dead, and the investigation of same was a very strange one, and the declaration of the cause of death. A slip of the tongue by the manager of the lounge that he was found with a “pillow over his head” added to the bizzare creepiness of the incident. The insinuations about it permeated the Internet.

SCOTUS has to have an eye on that, more specifically the more “conservative” judges.

I move we change the vocabulary for the judges. They’re not running for office, anyway.

When the Mockingbird Media use the word “conservative” for a federal judge, especially SCOTUS, what they really mean is a “constitutional” judge.

And when they say “liberal”, they really mean a “squishy” judge.

For example:

Antonin Scalia was a constitutional judge.

Ruth Bader Ginzburg is a squishy judge.

SCOTUS, or any federal judge, ruling out anything they don’t like on constitutional grounds, is a more powerful veto than the president’s, because they would never concede that territory again, ever. THAT is where the “balance of power” is upset in today’s America.


%d bloggers like this: