The Ongoing Concern Of The State Of California Is In Question An Analysis By Victor Davis Hanson Adam Andrzejewski

https://openthebooks.substack.com/p/the-ongoing-concern-of-the-state?s=w

The following is an abridged version of a talk delivered on Wednesday, April 20, 2022, during the question and answer portion of an OpenTheBooks.com virtual event. Videos, media, and other speeches are available at YouTube/OpenTheBooks.

QUESTON:

Dr. Hanson, You and I are both native Californians. So looking at California, do you think we’ve lost the state? Or do you have any strategy advice to reverse this current downward trend set up that we have, and bring some success to us? Just in the state of California.

ANSWER — VICTOR DAVIS HANSON:

California is sort of like a prodigal son. We’ve all had members of our family that we love, and we grew up with and we thought they were stable, and then they take drugs or they get wayward, they get in trouble, but we don’t disown them. Well, we don’t move away from them. We try to work with them and hope they can find redemption.

I think that’s what we’re doing in California.

So, there isn’t one Republican statewide officeholder. Republicans only have 11 of 53 Congressional seats. The rest are Democrats. Both houses of the state legislature have super majorities (Democrats). The ninth federal appellate court is the most liberal in the nation. So, they got what they wanted; the left did.

The Left got what they wanted.

Insights On Progressive Thinking From The Climate Action Council Public Hearing Francis Menton

https://us7.campaign-archive.com/?e=a9fdc67db9&u=9d011a88d8fe324cae8c084c5&id=3e2507af14

My previous post on Tuesday contained some highlights from the May 3 public hearing of New York’s Climate Action Council. The CAC is the body that is charged with devising a “Scoping Plan” to inform all us New Yorkers how we will achieve “zero carbon” electricity by 2030 and a “zero carbon” economy by 2050. I attended the hearing for about two and a half hours, during which about 60 people spoke.

Reflecting on the hearing a few days later, I think there are a few more highlights that would interest the readers, and will give some more insights into the nature of progressive thinking.

As stated in my prior post, of the 60 or so speakers, all but myself and four others were vigorous supporters of the critical necessity of achieving the stated zero carbon goals by the given dates as an urgent matter of saving our planet and our children. This was so despite what appeared to me to be manifestly huge issues of physical feasibility and cost that are almost certain to cause these grand “net zero” energy schemes to fail. The CAC’s draft “Scoping Plan,” as it currently exists for public comment, does not consider these feasibility or cost issues in any remotely adequate fashion, if at all. That fact did not appear to bother the overwhelming majority of the speakers.

MY SAY: THE REMARKABLE SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR-THE FIRST WOMAN APPOINTED TO THE SUPREME COURT (1981 to 2006)

Quotes:

The freedom to criticize judges and other public officials is necessary to a vibrant democracy. The problem comes when healthy criticism is replaced with more destructive intimidation and sanctions.”

– Sandra Day O’ Connor.

 

“The power I exert on the court depends on the power of my arguments, not on my gender.”

– Sandra Day O’ Connor.

On Roe v. Wadehttps://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/sandra-day-oconnor-and-reconsideration-roe-v-wade/

Her first public [Supreme Court] opinion on abortion came in the Akron case in 1983 [Akron v. Akron Center For Reproductive Health]. She had been on the court for two years. The Akron case served up to the court a series of abortion restrictions that really challenged Roe v. Wade [including requirements for: all abortions performed after the first trimester to be done in hospitals, parental consent before the procedure could be performed on an unmarried minor, doctors to counsel prospective patients, a 24 hour waiting period and that fetal remains be disposed of in a “humane and sanitary manner.”]. The court reaffirmed Roe, and O’Connor dissented, [saying, “I believe that the State’s interest in protecting potential human life exists throughout the pregnancy.”]

 There were four justices opposed to that, and there were four justices fully for that. And everybody assumed that O’Connor was going to be also fully for undercutting Roe. But she wouldn’t go along. She wrote a separate opinion, deciding the case very narrowly. She said there may be time in the future to deal with the bigger, deeper issue, but that time has not arrived.

Do the Unhinged Protesters Know It’s a CRIME to Demonstrate at a Supreme Court Justice’s Home? By J. Christian Adams

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2022/05/06/protests-at-supreme-court-justices-homes-are-crimes-n1595691

If you’ve never been to Goochland, Virginia, you’re missing out.

In Goochland, there is a large residential facility with free medical care, free college courses, and wellness programs for visitors, including “thinking for a change.”

You might just win a free trip if you follow through on the threat to “protest at Supreme Court Justice’s homes.” The Virginia Correctional Facility for Woman in Goochland awaits anyone who acts out their rage and shows up out of control at a Supreme Court Justice’s residence in response to the unethical and unprecedented leak of a draft opinion in the Dobbs abortion case.

The people of Virginia have decided that it is a crime to protest at a Virginian’s home.

Virginia Code Section 18.2-418 states:

It is hereby declared that the protection and preservation of the home is the keystone of democratic government; that the public health and welfare and the good order of the community require that members of the community enjoy in their homes a feeling of well-being, tranquility, and privacy, and when absent from their homes carry with them the sense of security inherent in the assurance that they may return to the enjoyment of their homes…

In other words, civil society benefits by keeping homes about family, friends, and peace and not clowns in Handmaid costumes. If you show up and protest a Supreme Court Justice near their home, you are committing a crime in Virginia.

Bipartisan Majority in Congress Slaps Down Biden on Iran Deal By Rick Moran

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2022/05/06/bipartisan-majority-in-congress-slaps-down-biden-on-iran-deal-n1595762

A bipartisan supermajority in Congress voted on Thursday night to require that any nuclear agreement with Iran must also address Iran’s support for terrorism in the region, and that the U.S. should not lift sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The non-binding resolution also stated that the administration should address Iran’s illegal ballistic missile program and China’s continuing purchases of Iranian oil that evade U.S. sanctions.

It’s unclear whether the Senate would have the opportunity to advise and consent on any deal that is struck as it would a treaty. The original 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA) was not presented to the Senate as a treaty and Congress was unable to give a meaningful vote on the agreement.

But Biden may be under considerable pressure from Senate Democrats to allow a vote on the deal. The Democrats know they are vulnerable on this issue and need the cover of a vote to weather what is certain to be fierce Republican attacks.

Politico:

Lawmakers from both parties said it was a warning shot to Biden’s negotiating team, who have all but acknowledged in private that an agreement that goes beyond curtailing Iran’s nuclear program is no longer possible, according to multiple people familiar with classified Hill briefings on the subject.

The vote was also a preview of the bipartisan rebuke that’s likely to come if the U.S. and Iran clinch an agreement that doesn’t address Iran’s non-nuclear activities and removes the IRGC’s terrorist designation — a “test vote,” in the words of one senator.

Iran wants the sanctions lifted while keeping their terrorist force, the IRGC, and their ever-improving ICBMs that threaten Israel, the Europeans, and soon, the USA.

Iran Mullahs Escalate Threats Against Jews, Biden Administration Appeases Mullahs Even More by Majid Rafizadeh

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18507/iran-threats-jews

These US rewards to Iran for terrorism, destabilizing the region, treating its own people with brutality and cheating on 2015 nuclear deal would significantly increase Iran’s revenues; these, in turn, will doubtless be funneled into the pockets of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Quds Force and their militia and terror groups including Hamas, the Houthis and Hezbollah for still more expansionism and terror.

Additionally, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi openly called for the destruction of Israel as he addressed anti-Israeli rallies: “This great movement that we are witnessing today in the form of protests is a symbol of the solidarity of the Muslim people that will lead to the destruction of the Zionist regime.”

Since the Biden administration assumed office, it has pursued the maximum appeasement policy with the ruling mullahs of Iran.

Instead of standing with its staunch allies in the Middle East, the Biden administration appears determined to stand with the Iranian regime. The ruling mullahs nonetheless appear intent on taking over their oil-rich neighbors, and eliminating Israel and the United States — all as America seems to imagine, falsely, that it can bribe its way into being spared.

When it to comes to the Iranian regime, all the Biden administration seems to care about is appeasing the ruling mullahs, reaching a weak nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic, and enhancing the global legitimacy of a country that the US itself called “the world’s worst state sponsor of terrorism.”

After Horrific Opinion Leak, Justices Must Plow Ahead All eyes remain on the chief justice, to see if he can find a way—any way—to restore to the Court a semblance of that which he has long cherished most, its perceived institutional integrity. By Josh Hammer

https://amgreatness.com/2022/05/06/after-horrific-scotus-leak-justices-must-plow-ahead-and-overturn-roe/

The scandalous leak of a full draft of Justice Samuel Alito’s five-justice-strong majority opinion in this term’s marquee Supreme Court case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, is an event without precedent in the Court’s history. 

If Alito’s coalition holds, the leaked majority opinion, a February-dated first draft whose authenticity has been confirmed by Chief Justice John Roberts, would represent the culmination of a half-century of pro-life efforts to overturn 1973’s Roe v. Wade atrocity. Roe, which was the Court’s worst decision since 1857’s Dred Scott v. Sandford due to the cases’ similar fundamental lies about human anthropology and human dignity, should have been overturned in 1992’s Planned Parenthood v. Casey. 

It wasn’t. On the contrary, pro-lifers were deigned to by a relativistic Court plurality, which mused in Casey: “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe and of the mystery of human life.” Now, at long last, after an unconscionable 63 million unborn children have been snuffed out in the womb since Roe, the Court in Dobbs seems poised to do what it could not do in Casey: declare the moral and legal illiteracy of Roe‘s central holding of a constitutional “right” to abortion.

Poised, that is. It is premature to celebrate; pro-lifers have been burned far too many times before. Furthermore, votes can still flip even at this late hour, as anyone with a long enough memory to recall the chief justice’s flip-flop in the 2012 Obamacare case, NFIB v. Sebelius, can attest. 

And that leads us to the leaker, whose identity is surprisingly still unknown as of this writing.

The New Intimidation Game Democrats take on the judiciary. James Freeman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-new-intimidation-game-11651869753?mod=opinion_lead_pos11

Five years ago the Journal’s prescient Kim Strassel published “The Intimidation Game” about the political left’s bare-knuckled attempts to silence conservatives. Now the so-called progressives who run much of the American government are encouraging or condoning efforts to bully the Supreme Court into political obedience.

Today Ms. Strassel writes:

The liberal response to Justice Samuel Alito’s draft opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade was as predictable as it was substance-free. Forget any discussion about the legal reasoning in the case. Or any soul-searching as to how Democrats came to face a 6-3 conservative high-court majority. Or any internal debate about how the party might craft an agenda that resonates with the public, so that it can maintain its hold on power and begin the process of reshaping the court.
Instead, Democrats proposed to burn every Washington institution down. Party leaders and activists openly attempted to intimidate the justices, hoping to change the outcome.

The unapologetic effort to bring political pressure to bear on the judiciary is shocking even to some media folk. Here’s the transcript of an interview T.J. Holmes of ABC News conducted this week with Rep. Karen Bass (D., Calif.) after Justice Alito’s draft opinion was leaked:

Mr. Holmes: Congresswoman, the Chief Justice called this an egregious breach, this leak. What should happen to the person who leaked this? It might not rise to the level of a criminal act, but–but it’s not just that this was a leak. This was a leak in this particular case, at this particular moment. What should happen to the person who leaked this?

Green Judges vs. American Gas The same three-judge panel keeps killing U.S. energy projects.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/green-judges-vs-american-gas-mountain-valley-pipeline-fourth-circuit-court-of-appeals-11648155967?mod=opinion_lead_pos4

Here’s a hard political reality behind high energy prices: It has become nearly impossible to build a natural gas pipeline in the U.S. Consider West Virginia’s Mountain Valley pipeline, which has come under a relentless siege by green groups and activists in judicial robes. While more than 90% complete, the pipeline is in danger of getting cancelled.

The 304-mile interstate pipeline aims to deliver natural gas from Appalachia’s Marcellus and Utica shale deposits to the mid- and south-Atlantic regions. A pipeline shortage has reduced the incentive for drillers to produce more natural gas. Yet states in the mid- and south Atlantic desperately need more gas as their populations grow.

Federal regulators have signed off on most of Mountain Valley’s environmental permits, but greens have filed lawsuits at every turn. Oddly, their repeated challenges keep landing before the same Fourth Circuit three-judge panel of Roger Gregory, James Wynn and Stephanie Thacker even though cases are supposed to be assigned to judges at random.

These same three judges also blocked a permit for the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, only to be overruled by a 7-2 Supreme Court majority in 2020. A few weeks later, Duke Energy and Dominion Energy cancelled the pipeline, blaming exploding costs, delays and uncertainty from future litigation. They probably saw what was happening to Mountain Valley.

Who’s a Threat to Democracy? The pro-choice left is attacking the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/whos-a-threat-to-democracy-supreme-court-abortion-roe-v-wade-ruth-sent-us-11651875512?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

The latest theme on the political left is that the Supreme Court Justices who might overturn Roe v. Wade are at war with democracy. It’s a strange argument, since overturning Roe would merely return abortion policy to the states for political debate in elections and legislatures. That’s the definition of democracy.

But since they brought it up, by all means let’s talk about who is really threatening democracy. An independent judiciary is crucial to democratic self-government, and after the leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s draft opinion, the left is targeting the Justices who might vote to end Roe.

***

An outfit known as Ruth Sent Us is inviting people to harass six “extremist justices.” The group, named after the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, this week published the locations of their homes in a map on its website (though it vanished without explanation on Friday).

The group is calling for protests at Catholic churches this Sunday and at the Justices’ homes next week. Why Catholic? Presumably because the church teaches that abortion is wrong and four of the five Justices said to be joining Justice Alito’s opinion are Catholic. The anti-religious animus at work here isn’t subtle.