It may seem strange to hear that the Democrats are preparing to investigate a Supreme Court justice. After all, Congress’ power over the Supreme Court is extremely limited: lifetime appointments of justices are designed precisely to protect them from political pressure that Congress or the president might exert after their confirmation.
It may seem even stranger when you see Justice Samuel Alito being featured prominently in Politico Playbook and on the front page of The New York Times morning edition for the high crime and misdemeanor of flying the American Revolutionary War flag.
But it’s part of a deliberate strategy to combat virtually the only check on Democratic political power: Congress and the White House can’t remove judges outright, but they can exert practical pressure, create public skepticism about their decisions, and reform the court, even to the point of expanding it.
The reason this happens is because the Supreme Court sometimes says no to what Democrats want. Already this year, the court Trump v. AndersonThe case involved state officials trying to remove Republican candidate Donald Trump from Colorado’s ballot on a treason charge. Authorities are now considering two other cases that could determine what immunity the president has from prosecution for his official duties and whether the law used to prosecute Enron Corp. executives can be used to send Jan. 6 rioters and trespassers to prison for years.
For three springs, the Supreme Court has endured annual attacks orchestrated by opposition researchers, friends in the press, allies in Congress and, at times, internal conspirators.
Well beyond the Trump presidency, the 2024 polling season could be a very hot summer for the administrative state. Decisions made on this date could overturn precedents and practices that have protected and empowered the federal bureaucracy for decades.
First, the infamous “Chevron doctrine” has given nearly 40 years of broad deference to government agencies to interpret and enforce the law as they see fit. Second, for nearly 50 years, government agencies like the IRS, EPA, and the National Labor Relations Board have been able to take disputes to administrative tribunals rather than to courts. The Supreme Court is poised to overturn those precedents that allowed for internal tribunals.
If these future rulings are added together,
Dobbs Overturned decision Roe v. WadeThere is a court that liberals hate as much as conservatives hated the Warren Court 50 years ago, but whereas conservative thinkers like L. Brent Boesel and Justice Robert Bork challenged the court’s legal thinking and sought to reform it, the American left today simply seeks to intimidate and delegitimize its targets.
“The Democrats have a four-pronged strategy for the Supreme Court.” A senior Republican Senate aide told The Blaze News: “First, it creates an incentive for justices to defect and change their decisions. Second, it delegitimizes the Supreme Court’s decisions. Third, it provides political cover for aggressive ethics reforms aimed at weakening the Republican majority through bureaucratic control, such as peremptory challenges based on unevenly applied ethics standards. Fourth, it creates the political conditions necessary to add to the court.”
We’ve seen modern Supreme Court intimidation for years — President Barack Obama famously violated State of the Union decorum by scolding the justices to their faces during his 2010 State of the Union address — but not now.
For three springs the court had endured annual attacks. It’s coordinated among opposition researchers, journalists, congressional allies and sometimes internal conspirators. The timing is important because spring is when the courts start issuing their decisions.
On May 5, 2022, Politico leaked Justice Alito’s ruling.
Roe v. Wade. Over the next few months, Democrats and their media allies launched a concerted and intense pressure campaign in the (futile) hope of changing the decision before it was finally announced.
On April 6, 2023, the left-leaning media outlet ProPublica published a series of sophisticated articles.
attack Justice Clarence Thomas criticized his wealthy friends and supporters and the trips he and his wife took with them.
On May 16, 2024, The New York Times sent out a “breaking news” alert that an upside-down American flag had been flown at Justice Samuel Alito’s New Jersey beach house on January 17, 2020. The Times reported that the upside-down flag, traditionally a symbol of distress but which has become a more left-wing, anti-American symbol in recent decades, was actually a covert symbol of the January 6th riots.
Coincidentally, Democrats including Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) introduced a resolution condemning the judge.
On May 20th, news “broke” that Mr. Alito had sold his Bud Light shares and bought Coors shares after the Dylan Mulvaney fiasco. What a scandal.
On May 22, The Times published another “breaking story,” this time about a family member flying a Revolutionary War flag, which the Times tried to link to the Capitol attack. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he was considering ethics reform. Left-wing activist group and longtime thorn in the sidelines Demand Justice announced a “six-figure campaign that includes digital and TV ad buys” targeting Alito, according to Politico.
While hardly unprecedented, the seasonal dropping of opposition polls on the Supreme Court is a new game. Rules and patterns are only beginning to take shape. The important thing to remember is that a shaming campaign is not the goal, just the first step. The goal is a frightened, docile Supreme Court.
Wall Street Journal:Samuel Alito and his wife, and the Ginsburg Standard
Blaze News: The liberal media is desperately trying to undermine Justice Alito and link him to the Bud Light boycott.
Daily Caller: ProPublica’s top donors also fund activist groups targeting Justice Clarence Thomas
Washington Examiner: Democratic dark money king funnels millions to ‘bipartisan’ Supreme Court oversight group
Sign up for Christopher Bedford’s newsletter
Sign up to receive Blaze Media’s Senior Political Editor Christopher Bedford’s newsletter.
In other news
Even Portland voters were fed up with the progressive district attorney.
“Restorative justice” and “race-affirming” law enforcement are still all the rage on National Public Radio, Voters are not so enthralled.
On Wednesday afternoon, Portland District Attorney Mike Schmidt endured the humiliation of calling his former employee, Nathan Vasquez, to cede the Democratic nomination to him.
This is no small thing. Schmidt was a poster child for the George Soros-backed movement to elect what are essentially pro-crime prosecutors to office. Portland was the epicenter of this movement and became a symbol of its disastrous impact.
Politico reported in May that Vázquez’s victory “would mean more than a repudiation of a progressive prosecutor. It would mark a culmination of simmering local frustrations over crime, homelessness and drug abuse and a major corrective to the leftward shift in criminal justice here and in many cities in 2020.”
Democratic politicians across the nation, take note.
Your doctor is a con man and your plane might explode
UCLA’s Dean of Admissions Jennifer Lucero’s progressive experiment with illegal race-focused admissions criteria has devastated the reputation of what was once one of the world’s top medical schools, the Washington Free Beacon reported Thursday.
“Within three years of Lucero’s hiring in 2020, UCLA dropped from sixth to 18th in U.S. News & World Report’s medical research rankings,” the Free Beacon reported. “And in some of her admitted classes, more than 50 percent of students failed standardized tests in emergency medicine, family medicine, internal medicine and pediatrics.”
If that still doesn’t convince you, read the Federal Aviation Administration’s report that 300 Boeing planes operated by United and American Airlines have defective fuel tanks that could explode in flight.
Bad news about Boeing has been pretty much a fixture this year with no signs of slowing down. Grade inflation and PC culture prove to be less fun when you move from pottery to STEM, right?
Washington Free Beacon: ‘Failed Medical School’: How racial favoritism, illegal in California, persists at UCLA
Fires Rise: Federalist: “Germany’s decriminalization of child pornography reminds us why social taboos are necessary”
There is no point in debating this dangerous path any longer. We were right, the “experts” were wrong, and now seemingly Western countries believe that child pornography is simply misunderstood. John Daniel Davidson of The Federalist Papers
“Pagan America: The Decline of Christianity and the Coming Dark Ages” In more detail:
Why is this happening in a supposedly enlightened country? Western countries like Germany? It’s no mystery. In fact, German legislators are simply applying the same distorted theory of consent that American legislators have been applying to other important issues for years. From same-sex marriage to so-called “gender-affirming care”, consent has been the theory that has eliminated one social taboo after another. The idea is widespread that there is very little that can be legitimately prohibited by law, as long as all parties freely consent…
According to this depraved way of thinking, nothing more than consent is necessary for a sexual relationship to be legitimate. The logic goes like this: minors are autonomous persons with human rights, so any restrictions on activities to which they consent are unjust. Sexual self-determination in particular means that there is no legitimate basis for laws criminalizing pedophilia or child pornography, so long as the child in question consents. By the very same token, laws banning minors from taking puberty-blocking drugs or heterosexuality are It is also considered unfair to take hormones or undergo irreversible surgery that scars or sterilizes the body…
But if, as pro-trans ideologues say, children can indeed consent to puberty-suppressing drugs, cross-sex hormones, and irreversible surgery, then how can we refute the pro-pedophile claim that children cannot consent to sexual relations with adults? I don’t…
Pillars: Survey: Young German priests reject liberal priorities of German Church
Blaze News: Butker’s lesson: take a side in the culture wars
