By Duncan Smith
Conservatives blasted a series of decisions this week from the U.S. Supreme court, where — as usual — ideological Leftist justices stuck together while alleged ‘conservative’ justices, including those appointed by President Trump, waffled, wavered, and become liberals.
One of the worst decisions came at the behest of ‘constitutionalist’ Justice Neil Gorsuch, the president’s first nominee. He sided with the high court’s liberals and new ‘swing vote’ Chief Justice John Roberts in a 6-3 decision enshrining gay or transgender rights in the 1964 Civil Rights act.
Travis Weber, vice president for policy and government affairs at the Family Research Council, called it a 'disappointing ruling,' adding that 'it's disappointing to see Justice Gorsuch lead the opinion for the majority. We had supported him, based on his originalist record.'
'This was not judging, this was legislating — a brute force attack on our constitutional system,' tweeted Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network.
Added lawyer, noted constitutional expert, author, and top conservative radio host Mark Levin: “Roberts no longer pretends to be a judge; now Gorsuch has left his robe behind as well.”
Worse, not enough justices were willing to accept or rule on any of the 10 gun control cases brought before the nine-judge body this year, including one by a New Jersey man who’s being denied his fundamental right of self-defense enshrined in the Second Amendment by that state’s horrendously unconstitutional law forbidding anyone from carrying a firearm to protect themselves.
So, what can Americans do after the Supreme Court, the highest judicial authority in the land, issues a ruling?
For now, nothing. But, and speaking of Levin, there is a potential solution.
In his 2013 book, “The Liberty Amendments,” Levin proposes a constitutional amendment that would limit the Supreme Court’s judicial activism and authority by empowering states, upon the votes of three-fifths of legislatures, to override or overturn high court decisions.
The problem is getting the new amendment proposed and then ratified. Still, there are ways to do that, as well — as Levin also noted.
Article V of the Constitution:
“...provides for two methods of amending the Constitution. The first method, where two-thirds of Congress passes a proposed amendment and then forwards it to the state legislatures for possible ratification by three-fourths of the states, has occurred on twenty-seven occasions. The second method, involving the direct application of two-thirds of the state legislatures for a Convention proposing Amendments, which would thereafter also require a three-fourths ratification vote by the states, has been tried in the past but without success. Today it sits dormant.”
Congress will never propose an amendment to limit the power of the Supreme Court. The only way that happens is if enough states call for a convention to propose specific amendments, including this one.
President Trump is Breaking Down the Neck of the Federal Reserve!
He wants zero rates and QE4!
You must prepare for the financial reset