More Madison; Less Tea Party Fundraising

The other day, I got a fundraising email from the Tea Party Patriots imploring me to pony up and help them “defend the Supreme Court.”

Our constitutional rights are in jeopardy if a conservative isn’t nominated and approved to fill former Justice Antonin Scalia’s shoes on the Supreme Court.”

If?

Really?

They make it sound like the Constitution remains totally intact and functioning just like it should. But OMG! if an Obama justice gets on the Court all is lost. And by the way, send money.

Here’s more about how the Tea Party Patriots will “defend” the Supreme Court.

With the untimely passing of Justice Antonin Scalia in February, the stakes for 2016 are higher than ever. The Obama administration and the entire left-of-center movement are throwing everything they’ve got at Senate Republicans in an effort to force them to cave and confirm a liberal Supreme Court nominee. They want to permanently strip the Supreme Court of Justices who love and uphold the Constitution, and replace them with far-left activists who believe in a ‘living Constitution.’ We cannot let this happen!”

Yes! Because everything was great before, right? We need a good conservative justice who will keep everything OK! You know, like John Roberts! Or how about Ronald Reagan Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals appointee Judge Richard A. Posner. You know, the guy who said, “I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation.”

Oh. Wait.

Despite years of evidence the Republican SCOTUS nominees aren’t any better than Democrats, numerous people have told me that I need to vote for Donald Trump because of the Supreme Court. He will at least appoint “good justices” so I’m told.

Look. There is no such thing.

Every politically connected lawyer who makes her or his way into the federal judiciary system will be steeped in federal supremacy. Even if they believe in “originalism,” they will allow judicial precedent to bind their decisions. Replacing Supreme Court justices is like replacing drivers in a broken down car. The new guy may actually be a “better” driver, but the car still ain’t going anywhere.

So please, don’t talk to me about “defending” the sanctity of the Supreme Court. That ship sailed not very long after the ratification of the Constitution. Don’t try to convince me that I need to vote for some Republican because of the Supreme Court. Don’t talk about some federal judges “saving” the Constitution.

It won’t happen.

In fact, I’m going to be really blunt. If you’re counting on some federal judicial temple monkeys (as my friends Bryan Baucom calls them) to protect and defend the Constitution, you’re part of the problem.

James Madison gave us a blueprint to resist overreaching federal power. You’ll notice he didn’t mention the SCOTUS.

Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular States, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union, the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassment created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, very serious impediments; and were the sentiments of several adjoining States happen to be in Union, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.”[Emphasis added]

We need more of this, and less Tea Party Patriot fundraising.

 

 

 

Tags: , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: