Left-Wing Vox Ignores Separation of Powers, Suggests Pushing Justices Sotomayor and Kagan to Retire
In this episode of Democrats Gonna Democrat…
If we’ve learned anything about the Democrats over the years, it’s that they’ll do virtually anything to win. If they can’t win by the rules, they’ll try to change the rules. if they can’t change the rules, they’ll cheat.
While we’ve seen the above truism play out in election after election for decades, the Democrats are blatantly playing the same game by attempting to force leftist justices onto the court.
After then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell steadfastly refused to seat Merrick Garland on the court after he was nominated by Barack Obama in 2016, and just as steadfastly marshaled Trump nominee Amy Coney Barrett onto the court in 2020, hysterical Democrats called for packing the Supreme Court after Joe Biden won the 2020 election.
So, after even Biden opposed the court-packing idea, Ian Millhiser, a senior correspondent with left-wing rag Vox, suggested another plan to Democrats after 87-year-old Ruth Bader Ginsburg remained on the court until her 2020 death: “persuade” the left’s two most beloved liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor (68) and Elana Kagan (62) to retire while the Democrats control the White House and Senate, and replace them with younger, radical associate justices like Ketanji Brown Jackson. Here’s Millhiser:
The U.S. Senate is a fundamentally broken institution Democratic judges need to account for that in their retirement decisions.
We have now lived with the consequences of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s late-life arrogance for more than two years.
On cue, Mark Joseph Stern, senior writer for Slate, another left-wing rag, hopped aboard Millhiser’s train:
I think Sotomayor and Kagan are brilliant justices and I’d be sad to see them go. But Ian is indisputably correct about the political calculus here. After 2025, Democrats may not hold the White House and the Senate for a decade+. This argument should be taken seriously.
Of course Stern thinks Millhiser should be taken seriously: these guys are peas in the same left-wing pod.
So hold the bus. Setting aside the separation of powers, why should an associate justice on the U.S. Supreme Court — someone who has reached the pinnacle of his or her professional career — walk away from that career based on political considerations? And, Mr. Millhiser, please explain how your desperate plan conflates with blind justice. I’ll wait.
The most recent justice to retire from the high court, 84-year-old liberal Steven Breyer, nominated by former President Bill Clinton, was confronted by dozens of progressive advocacy campaigns urging him to retire under the Biden administration.
While Breyer ultimately left the court earlier this year and was replaced by the aforementioned 52-year-old Ketanji Brown Jackson, Breyer had flatly rejected the notion in his 2021 book, The Authority of the Court and the Peril of Politics, that judges should rely on any type of political consideration to determine the right time to retire.
A judge’s loyalty is to the rule of law, not the political party that helped to secure his or her appointment.
Amen. But again, anything to win.
Following the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in June, Democrat lawmakers blistered conservative justices, most notably Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, declaring the decision “illegitimate,” while Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the court “extremist” in a court-bashing letter to House Democrats.
While this extremist Supreme Court works to punish and control the American people, Democrats must continue our fight to expand freedom in America.
Right. By attacking the arbiter of the U.S. Constitution and the law of land. Please.
The Bottom Line
The bottom line is the gist of my opening paragraph. The Democrat Party will go to any extreme to win, including in the highest court in the land. If they can’t win by the rules, they’ll try to change the rules. if they can’t change the rules, they’ll cheat — in this case by contemplating violation of the doctrine of constitutional law under which the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) are separate but equal.
Also known as the system of checks and balances, each branch is given certain powers so as to check and balance the other branches.
So who checks the Democrat Party, my liberal friends?
Post a Comment