| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| How Many Divisions Does Judge Bates Command? |
| 2018-08-06 |
| h/t Instapundit [PJMedia] To begin: federal judges have no authority -- none -- to countermand an executive order issued by the president of the United States in the lawful pursuit of his executive function under Article Two of the Constitution. And yet, so out of line has the lesser judiciary -- that is to say, every federal judge below the Supreme Court level -- become that we have now arrived at this blatantly unconstitutional pass. A federal judge on Friday ordered a total restart of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, in a hit to the Trump administration. ...As I've frequently noted on this site, the lower federal courts are entirely creations of Congress, and thus subordinate to it. And they certainly have no authority over the executive branch, other than that which they have aggrandized unto themselves via Marbury v. Madison and other rulings of dubious constitutionality. The notion that the three enumerated branches of the federal government are "co-equal" is a polite fiction to disguise the fact that the Supreme Court (Article Three) is the last and least of them, and can be stripped of all jurisdiction except its enumerated powers any time Congress so ordains. ...Let's call this what it is: an attempt by a single judge in the District of Columbia to usurp the power of the executive simply because he doesn't like the substance of the administration's arguments. But the only argument the administration needs is: "because." The Left prefers to implement its policy preferences via the courts, because it only takes a handful, or even one, to overturn the will of the people. But our system of government as founded -- and as re-articulated by Abraham Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address -- is devoted to the proposition that here the people rule via their elected representatives, not judges. The President is every bit as much the arbiter of the Constitution as is the Congress or the Supreme Court; if Trump's ready to tackle the problem of the runaway federal judiciary, this would be a great test case. Because, sooner or later, it's a battle that needs to be fought and won if the constitutional balance of power is to be protected. To paraphrase Andrew Jackson, "John Bates has made his decision -- now let him enforce it." |
| Posted by:g(r)omgoru |
| #3 " any time Congress so ordains" Good luck getting Congress to do its constitutional duty. That bunch has been AWOL for decades now. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2018-08-06 12:16 |
| #2 So much of the population prefers princes, barons and dukes, as long as they're their princes, barons, and dukes. A real republic doesn't have people in positions of authority for life. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2018-08-06 05:41 |
| #1 ...If the White House did somehow find the stones to channel Andy Jackson and do this, the screams of 'constitutional crisis' would be deafening. The screams when they found out there was in truth nothing that could be done would be even worse. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2018-08-06 04:59 |