The Supreme Court oxymoron: When lawyers use law to join the lawless
The Supreme Court is once again a headline. Judge Ginsburg died leaving eight judges on the nine-seat court. The so-called media, as usual, portrays SCOTUS as the greatest authority since God gave his law to Moses. But, now, the worship of man’s law begins again in the news. (Tbe Man Who Made the Supreme Court | Abbeville Institute) But actually, the term Supreme Court is as much an oxymoron as George Carlin’s Legally Drunk or Jumbo Shrimp.
The drainage of all political conversation regarding SCOTUS seems to flow to an outlet drain of something called “checks and balances.” – Checks and Balances | Definition, History, & Facts | Britannica
This expression is mentioned nowhere in the constitution, but it seems, today, as revered as “all men are created equal.”
This second comment coming from “The Virginia Declaration of Rights” then borrowed by Jefferson for the July 4th “Declaration of Independence.” All for the thirteen independent and sovereign colonial governments. The most famous secession document ever written but singularly and certainly no founding document. – Virginia Resolutions, 21 December 1798
The comparison comment is simply to indicate how richly, idiotic, comments become as revered by politicians as Rasputin’s blather was to the Russian Czar. And how rich is the irony that the SCOTUS has become, in the minds of liberals and conservative wannabes, as authoritative as the old Soviet Politburo? – Politburo – Wikipedia
If there are “checks and balances” where are they?
Today’s constitutionally illiterate Congress, judiciary, and bureaucrats refer to decisions by the SCOTUS as “the law of the land.” If that is true who checks them? They can’t have it both ways: Either SCOTUS is the law of the land or they can be checked.
They cannot be both.- Gorsuch: I accept Roe v. Wade as ‘the law of the land’ | TheHill
Secession is called treason. Nullification is called treason.
Next, it must be assumed by many that Article 5 of the constitution is treason (the amending process). But then, that is how SCOTUS was “checked” in 1795 with the 11th Amendment. – Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution – Wikipedia
And the history of this amendment teaches that the people were shocked when they realized the SCOTUS thought it had the authority to override a “state’s right”—Georgia. Immediately, as if panic had set in as to the monster (SCOTUS), they had created, the states essentially added an addition to The Bill of Rights—the aforesaid 11th amendment.
It was James Madison himself, lauded historically and contemporaneously as “The Father of the Constitution,” who vetoed the notion that SCOTUS was the ultimate law. He stated as much in one of American history’s most respected documents, “The Virginia Resolutions.”
The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions were political statements drafted in 1798 and 1799 in which the Kentucky and Virginia legislatures took the position that the federal Alien and Sedition Acts were unconstitutional.
And it was Madison who used the phrase “checks and balances” in one of the Federalist Papers:
But, now we are in the midst of a political battle for the selection of who to fill the ninth seat.
The one vacated by the passing of Judge Ginsburg.
All sides except real conservatives try to make arguments for filling or not filling the vacancy immediately. Clearly, some want a Trump appointee, and others want to wait for a Harris/Biden /Democrat cabal appointee. Yes, that’s what I meant.
It probably won’t matter in the end. Whoever is the appointee, licks his/her chops in glee at what is referred to as a lifetime (it’s not—it’s for a period of good behavior) appointment and once appointed does what he/she wants. After all, he/she is one-ninth of “the law of the land.” And they neither will be checked nor balanced.
No need to point out the fraudulent nature of guys like John Roberts. He is not alone in saying one thing while believing another. History is rife with these great “legal minds,” changing their minds.
SCOTUS is not made of exceptional men (and women)
What must be remembered is that these guys and gals are not the great “legal minds” portrayed by the bureaucrats and media. The law isn’t some esoteric compilation of petty, added-together rules and regulations stapled and glued together as if is a magnificent nonlinear mathematical differential equation.
Their law is a simple deciphering for local communities of some basic law. And any complication is no more impenetrable than its basic foundation: The Ten Commandments. The only people who need an interpretation of these are the animals allegedly “protesting” in Portland, Seattle, Chicago, New York, etc.
In the long run, it isn’t going to make any difference. A large part of what is described as “the country” (once a union of countries) doesn’t care about the law, or order, being checked or being balanced.
They only care about taking what belongs to others. And they will not be checked because they are unbalanced.
The SCOTUS is nothing but a historically inept collection of appointed bureaucrats pretending to know the law even better than the Scribes and Pharisees.
So why is SCOTUS in the news? There really ain’t much new going on.
Because we all need a laugh –
Paul Yarbrough writes novels, short stories, poetry, and essays. His first novel. Mississippi Cotton is a Kindle bestseller.