BLIND SQUIRREL FINDS A SUPREME COURT NUT
Exclusive: Matt Barber spotlights prayer decision that has Christophobic groups fuming
Follow Barber on Twitter.
While
in the vast majority of their constitutionally related writings the
Founding Fathers were explicit that the judicial branch of government is
effectively the weakest of the three, such is not the case with today’s
modern misapplication. Americans currently live under what is, for all
intents and purposes, a counter-constitutional judiciocracy led by nine
unelected, black-robed autocrats.
Over many decades, the other two branches
of government, the legislative and the executive, have, for some
inexplicable reason, acquiesced to the notion of judicial supremacy – a
dangerously dominant concept that erroneously regards the United States
Supreme Court as the final arbiter of all things public policy. If this
is so, then these nine men and women are ultimately unaccountable to
anyone or anything, and the other two branches of government are but
toothless figurehead bodies merely spinning their wheels while spending
our dollars.
This flies in the face of the framers’
intent. It’s also the very unfortunate reality under which we live. It
is fully within the constitutional authority of the other two branches
of government to rein in these judges gone wild, but, regrettably, no
one, as of yet, seems to have the mettle to do what needs to be done.
Article III, Section 2, of the U.S.
Constitution gives Congress the authority to “check” judicial activism,
up to and including when justices illegitimately legislate from the
highest bench in the land: “[T]he Supreme Court shall have appellate
jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under
such regulations as the Congress shall make.”
That’s huge. Unfortunately, to date, Congress has been either unwilling or unable to enact such regulations.
CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE READING...
No comments:
Post a Comment