Displaying posts published in

September 2020

Ginsburg’s Death and the Dangerous Politics Ahead .By Charles Lipson

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/09/20/replacing_ginsburg_could_force_a_constitutional_crisis_144252.html

Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s life in the law cast a long shadow. In death, she casts a long shadow, too.

Since Justice Ginsburg was both historic figure and reliable liberal vote on the United States Supreme Court, replacing her was always going to be contentious. After all, the court’s direction for years to come is at stake. Candidate Donald Trump made the “activist federal courts” a major campaign issue in 2016. As president, he and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have delivered on that issue. They have confirmed over 200 new judges, almost all of them strenuously opposed by Democrats. Now, he has been given his third opportunity to nominate a Supreme Court justice. His first appointment replaced the late conservative icon, Antonio Scalia, with another conservative, Neil Gorsuch. His second replaced Anthony Kennedy, a moderate conservative and occasional swing vote, with Brett Kavanaugh, a more consistent conservative vote.

Replacing any Supreme Court justice is important, but substituting a conservative for a liberal giant like Ginsburg or the 82-year-old Justice Stephen Breyer, when he retires, would be far more consequential. That’s why the fight over the Ginsburg’s vacant seat will be so fierce, worse even than the brawl over Kavanaugh, who was smeared by multiple, last-minute allegations of sexual assault, none of which were substantiated. That fight was so toxic that several senior Democrats openly rejected the idea that Kavanaugh should be presumed “innocent until proven guilty,” a bedrock assumption of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence for over a thousand years.

Pelosi: House will use ‘every arrow in our quiver’ to stop Trump Supreme Court nominee

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said on Sunday the House had its “options” when asked about the possibility of impeaching President Trump and Attorney General William Barr should the White House and Senate Republicans jam a Supreme Court nominee through the process during a lame duck session after Election Day.

“We have our options, we have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss right now,” Pelosi told George Stephanopoulos on ABC’s “This Week.” “But the fact is, we have a big challenge in our country. This president has threatened to not even accept the results of the election with statements that he and his henchmen have made. So right now, our main goal… would be to protect the integrity of the election as we protect the American people from the coronavirus.”

When Stephanopoulos pressed again about whether the House wouldn’t “rule anything out,” Pelosi pivoted toward the responsibilities of elected lawmakers.

“We have a responsibility, we take an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. We have a responsibility to meet the needs of the American people. When we weigh the equities of protecting our democracy, requires us to use every arrow in our quiver,” Pelosi responded without going into detail of what option are on the table.

What Attorney General Barr really said about justice By Andrew C. McCarthy

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/517266-what-attorney-general-barr-really-said-about-justice

It would be far better to read for ourselves Attorney General (AG) William Barr’s Constitution Day speech at Hillsdale College than to rely on the media-Democrat complex to relate what he said faithfully. The speech is posted on the Justice Department’s website. It is a scintillating explanation of the role of federal prosecutors in a free society, operating under a Constitution that guarantees liberty by dividing government power and making its exercise politically accountable.

What has gotten the most attention is the AG’s supposed belittling of career prosecutors. Ripped from its context, as if he were flipping off bumper sticker bromides rather than developing an argument, critics have feigned outrage that Barr equated the notion of trusting assistant United States attorneys (AUSAs) to make weighty decisions with letting the class syllabus be set by the tots at a Montessori preschool.

You will no doubt be shocked to learn that this is a complete distortion of what he said.

What Barr was driving at involves a significant philosophical dispute about prosecutorial power. Progressives regard it as a mere formality that the Framers vested the duty to execute the laws in the president. In their construct, federal prosecutors are not so much executive branch officials who serve the president as they are government lawyers who serve an abstraction known as “the rule of law,” which is vaguely understood to be laws enacted by Congress and rulings rendered by the judiciary — unless a Democratic president doesn’t approve of the laws or the jurisprudence. Also in their view, assistant U.S. attorneys are supposed to go about their weighty business completely insulated from politics — and, in Republican administrations, insulated from oversight by Main Justice, too. As for the attorney general, he is not the president’s lawyer but the public’s legal agent for purposes of reining in the president — except in the Obama administration, in which it was evidently fine for the attorney general to be the president’s self-described “wingman.”

Heiresses on the Barricades Bruce Bawer

https://www.city-journal.org/heiresses-rebellions

Whatever Clara Kraebbe may do with the rest of her life, the 20-year-old Rice University student won’t outdo the publicity she’s received since her recent arrest by the NYPD for felony vandalism. Reading in the New York Post about young Clara, who lives with her father, a child psychiatrist, and her mother, an architect, in a $1.8 million Upper East Side luxury condo and a pre-Revolutionary War Connecticut mansion, I asked myself: Whom does this girl remind me of?

And then it came to me. Of course: she’s a modern-day Jane Fonda.

While Clara is a Manhattan princess, Jane was Hollywood royalty, daughter of one of the great actors of the movies’ golden age. While Jane was a poster girl for the hordes of well-off kids who protested the Vietnam War and looked down their noses at “hardhats,” Clara is the face of BLM/Antifa rioters who sneer at cops and other inferiors.

Raised in privilege, the beneficiaries of capitalist success, both these young women turned against the system that had given them so much. Clara trashed downtown Manhattan businesses and, according to reports, wanted to commandeer upper-class New York apartments of the sort she lives in and hand them over to the poor. It’s not quite up there with climbing on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun, as Jane did back in 1972, but it’ll do for these days of diminished expectations.

Nancy Pelosi’s Reign of Error Jay Cost

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/nancy-pelosis-reign-of-error

Nancy Pelosi made news late last month, and not in a good way. She was caught on a security camera having her hair done at a San Francisco salon that has been closed to the public during the coronavirus lockdown. When confronted with the footage, she did not apologize for the do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do impression, but rather expressed outrage at the salon owner for setting her up.

If you have followed Pelosi’s career over the past 15 or so years, the whole affair was hardly a surprise. Pelosi is one of the most unpopular figures in the last decade of American politics. According to RealClearPolitics, her average favorability rating stands at just 38%, compared to a 52% unfavorable rating — numbers that are worse than President Trump’s at the time of writing. Pelosi’s numbers have been this poor for quite some time. In January 2007, shortly after she was first sworn in as speaker of the House, an ABC News/ Washington Post poll found Pelosi enjoying a 54% favorable rating, compared to a 25% unfavorable rating. But last fall, the ABC/ Post poll found her approval rating at just 38%, roughly in line with where her numbers in RealClearPolitics are today.

Congressional leaders often struggle with this kind of broad unpopularity. The same ABC/ Post poll from last fall had Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell with just a 25% approval rating, compared to 51% disapproval. Likewise, Harry Reid, the former Democratic leader of the Senate, usually had net-negative approval ratings when he was in office, as did former Republican Speakers John Boehner and Paul Ryan. It goes with the turf: Congress as an institution is widely disliked, but voters tend to approve of their own representatives, so the public usually focuses its ire upon the leaders of the institution.