Supreme Court

Liberals against freedom of conscience

Michael Barone, Washington Examiner

Why is it considered “liberal” to compel others to say or fund things they don’t believe? That’s a question raised by the Supreme Court’s decisions in three cases this year. And it’s a puzzling development for those of us old enough to remember when liberals championed free speech — even when it involved advocacy of sedition or sodomy — and conservatives wanted government to restrain or limit it.

Why Gun Grabbers Are All In To Defeat Kavanaugh Nomination

"Kavanaugh believes in a very vigorous Second Amendment right to bear arms, and he thinks there is little room for constitutionally permissible gun control," says UCLA law professor Adam Winkler, which is one reason why the Left so vehemently opposes him.

109 Conservative Leaders Demand Prompt Kavanaugh Supreme Court Confirmation

In a statement released through the Conservative Action Project 109 leaders of the conservative movement demanded that the Senate promptly confirm Judge Brett Kavanaugh so the Supreme Court will have a full complement of nine sitting justices when the next term of the Court begins on October 1, 2018.

New Poll: Conservatives Say Kavanaugh Will Boost GOP In Midterms

Almost 95% of those polled by FedUp PAC say the Kavanaugh nomination will boost the GOP in the midterms because “most Americans support the Constitution and want Supreme Court justices who will follow it.”  Less than 4% think the nomination will hurt Republicans this fall.

To get Brett Kavanaugh confirmed, conservatives have to fight the Democrats' playbook

Rep. Ken Buck, Washington Examiner

Undoubtedly, Democrats are preparing a barrage of personal attacks and identity politics accusations against this eminently qualified judge. Republicans must stand their ground. We must demand a civil debate over Kavanaugh’s experience and methods of judicial interpretation. We must hold every Democratic Senator to account for their vote. We must stand by a good nominee and diligently shield him from the flaming arrows of vitriol headed his way.

Will Brett Kavanaugh Stand For Property Rights?

There’s lots of talk about where Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh stands on the Roe v Wade abortion decision and if he would vote to rescind it. There is another very controversial Supreme Court decision made just a few years ago, supported by Anthony Kennedy, the Kelo decision, that conservates should be asking about during Judge Kavanaugh's vetting.

Ten Commandments of the Supreme Court

Victor Davis Hanson, National Review

For the last half-century, the Supreme Court’s liberal majority made the Court the iconic “crown jewel” of American democracy. With Trump’s two conservative picks, and a possible third in the next two years, the Court will soon be recalibrated as the costume jewelry of the Constitution — widely derided as an antiquarian relic, analogous to the ossified Electoral College or the parochial idea of two senators for each state regardless of population size.

Our Rules of the Game: US Constitution

Walter E. Williams, CNS News

We should demand that Supreme Court justices act as referees and enforce the U.S. Constitution. If they don't and play favorites with different groups of Americans, as we've seen, the potential for conflict among the American people is enhanced. Who is appointed to the high court becomes the all-consuming issue. The question is not whether a justice would uphold and defend the Constitution but whether he would rig the game to benefit one American or another.

The Supreme Court Has Been Making Policy

Jay Cost, National Review

Did the Founders intend that the choice of a Supreme Court nominee would be one of the most lasting and consequential decisions any president could make? No! The president has (or at least, should have) substantially bigger fish to fry. But both the Senate and the president have found themselves deeply enmeshed in these matters because the nomination of a Supreme Court justice is the only means of control the public has over the policymaking powers of the Court.

Liberals Are Super Sad About the Supreme Court. Good.

Kurt Schlichter, Townhall

The Democrats are lying on the ground, howling like banshees and wriggling around on their backs like cockroaches. But, despite their best efforts, they still have the potential of getting back on their feet again. Let’s not let that happen. Let’s kick them (figuratively) while they are down, win it all in November and in 2020, and not be satisfied until the Supreme Court is 9-0 for liberty.

The judicial mindset of Brett Kavanaugh

Cal Thomas, Washington Times

Rush Limbaugh had a good suggestion for Republicans. On his radio show, Mr. Limbaugh said Republicans should dispense with a lengthy confirmation process and visits by Judge Kavanaugh to the offices of individual senators (they know him because he has visited before during his previous confirmation) and get right to a confirmation vote. If Republicans stay unified and if they can pick off two or three Democrats who are up for re-election in states where Mr. Trump won handily in 2016, Judge Kavanaugh, with his stellar credentials, should be easily and properly confirmed.

Democrats’ Anti-Catholic Bigotry On Kavanaugh Will Cost Them In November

In the near term, months of televised Anti-Catholic bias from Democrats as they try to block the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh could solidify the Catholic voting trend demonstrated in the 2016 election, giving Republicans a huge advantage in the 2018 midterm and 2020 presidential elections.

What Kind of Supreme Court Will We Have Now?

Ben Shapiro, National Review

If there’s one proposition that distinguishes Kavanaugh from his more militant colleagues, it’s his unique capacity to write specific, detailed decisions that knock down trees while leaving forests intact. Kavanaugh’s opinions tend not to be ringing endorsements or rebukes of the Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas type; they tend to be narrowly tailored decisions that recall Chief Justices Roberts and Rehnquist. It means those waiting for the ground to shift when it comes to major decisions from the Court might be waiting in vain.

From a Kennedy to a Kavanaugh

George Neumayr, The American Spectator

Contrary to the carping of the Never Trumpers, who never give up a grudge, Trump can be discerning and magnanimous in moments of great consequence. He doesn’t let pettiness cloud his judgment and looks for quality wherever it exists. He takes his core presidential responsibilities seriously and has kept his campaign promise to choose judges from the Federalist Society list. He has given official Republican Washington more than it could have ever hoped for and yet some of its quarters still treat him shabbily. Trump decided to go with a seasoned jurist whom the Democrats can’t Bork but who could still push the court’s pendulum back to originalism. Kavanaugh looks like another Gorsuch.

The lesson for the Right: Trump picked a conservative judge because he had to

Editors, Washington Examiner

Trump provided his list and his promise because conservatives were willing to support him if he would make that promise, and to oppose him if he would not. Trump kept his promise because he suspects that still, many conservatives will support him for keeping it, and would oppose him if he broke it. The lesson is obvious. Conservatives should remain independent from the president and shouldn’t let the man determine their views, one way or another. The commentator or activist who gets on the Trump Train, and the one who declares he will never give any support both sacrifice their leverage.

Trump Appoints Kavanaugh Liberals Go Nuts

While liberals are going nuts making Judge Brett Kavanaugh out to be a rightwing ideologue, his record tells a different story of a judge committed to applying the law and the Constitution as written. That may be a radical idea to liberals and Democrats, but it is the view that held sway in our judiciary for almost 150 years.

Is a Trump Court in the Making?

Patrick J. Buchanan, Creators

Clearly, the advisers to George W. Bush and President Trump looked back at the successes and the failures of previous GOP presidents, and have done a far better job of vetting nominees. They reached outside for counsel. It was Trump's 2016 pledge to draw his nominees to the high court from a list of 20 judges and scholars supplied by the Federalist Society that reassured conservatives and helped him unite his party and get elected. On the issue of judicial nominees and justices to the Supreme Court, Trump has kept his word.

Why Should a Single Federal Judge Be Able to Make Law for the Whole Country?

John Fund, National Review

Confusion about the proper role of the courts extends to many of our sitting judges. Last month, while the Supreme Court narrowly upheld the so-called Trump travel ban, Justice Clarence Thomas raised an issue that the next Supreme Court justice may have to weigh in on. Why is it, he asked, that a single federal district judge can impose an injunction blocking a presidential executive order in all 50 states even if none of his colleagues (599 district judges) thinks it’s a good idea?

Even abortion enthusiasts know Roe v. Wade is a legal abomination

Charles Hurt, Washington Times

The fact of so many 5-4 decisions lays bare the truly shocking and stunning reality that the high court has become infected by at least four Supreme Court justices who have no idea what they are doing. They have never grasped the Constitution. They have no understanding of the Separation of Powers. They are totally unaware of the limitations of their own powers. They are, to be blunt, constitutionally illiterate. So many 5-4 decisions simply means that there are at least four justices now on the court who think that the court — not the elected legislature — makes law.

‘Don’t You Dare Touch Roe!’ — Judicial Confirmation Silly Season Begins

Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review

Regardless of a jurist’s legal position on substantive due process, or of the jurist’s moral or policy positions on what it has wrought, Roe is part of a doctrinal edifice. To reach out and try to overrule it, particularly in a case in which it is not necessary to do so, would be seen as an attack on the entire edifice. The Supreme Court is not going to take that on. A more conservative Court would reject the promiscuous language of Justice Kennedy’s “liberty” musings and admonish that the polling station, not the courthouse, is the place for working out most clashes between the individual and society. It is not going to turn back the cultural clock.