16 Comments
тна Return to thread

I do not mind the judiciary gently applying the brakes. That's the purpose of the least dangerous branch.

Causing everything to screech to a halt?

Not so much.

Expand full comment

Right, but many of these judges were planted in their spots, specifically to resist the tear down efforts that are going on now. For example, take the federal judge in RI. His wife runs a non-profit that took USAID money. She pays herself a 6 fig salary, drives luxury cars and the judge benefits from this arrangement too, we would have to think. Only 3% of her USAID money goes to her "cause".

Expand full comment

Yeah, many charities are a con job. You can get information on all of them on the internet, google charities.

Expand full comment

Be interesting to see if they invoke Insurrection Act and use Military Tribunals. Out Judiciary is just as corrupt as the politicians.

Expand full comment

Keep that popcorn handy, the period March through the Fall should feature some huge fireworks that we have not seen before brother! Both on the financial side and the criminal/political side.

Expand full comment

I hate everything that refers to itself as a "judge." Why are they better than anyone else? Why are they judges? Because they hold a fancy law degree from an Ivy League propaganda school? Run all of them out of office.

Expand full comment

I'm not so sure about that, Anon. Since federal judges are largely political appointees with lifetime tenure, and the Supreme Court able to nix legislation on purely political 5-4 votes, the Judiciary has the potential to be the most dangerous, unaccountable branch of government.

Expand full comment

The role of the judiciary today has been тАЬassumedтАЭ by them over the decades. Their function is not in the Constitution, their existence is given as a Congressional mandate, if needed.

Expand full comment

It has been since Marbury v Madison!

Expand full comment

Judicial Review by the SCOTUS, But even that is not in the Constitution.

Expand full comment

YouтАЩre right, they created it out of thin air!

Expand full comment

Read a little history. That might help. Just as "everything I don't like is racist," similarly "every ruling I don't like is biased."

Expand full comment

No. Judges don't rule from the bench.

Expand full comment

Have you read Marbury v Madison? Judges absolutely legislate from the bench! Hell, Roe trashed the 10th amendment for 50 years! Chevron and Qualified Immunity were created out of thin air! How does a single Circuit Court Judge impose nationwide injunctions?

Expand full comment

Excellent response, Mr. Slick, kudos to you! I was gobsmacked at the comment you responded to - how could anyone think judges don't rule from the bench?

Expand full comment

IтАЩm not sure, but itтАЩs not even a partisan issue. Judges have done this for over 200 years. The Marbury case involved a justice of the peace that wasnтАЩt getting the respect he thought he deserved because then Secretary of State James Madison was actually following the Judiciary Act of 1789. The Supremes sides with Marbury and judicial activism and review was set loose.

Expand full comment