(A.K.A. Non-Original Rants)

–Co-opting good stuff from all over the ‘Net and maybe some original thoughts—ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE

________________________________________________________________________________________________

DEI SCOTUS Hire gets a well-deserved shellacking

Wow. Justice Barrett came out of her corner and didn’t pull any punches when it came to Justice Jackson’s dissent in the SCOTUS decision regarding the powers of district court judges.

As a reminder:

In a 6-3 decision that handed President Trump a major victory, the Court put the brakes on runaway district judges issuing nationwide injunctions — an abuse that’s become the left’s favorite tool for stalling any policy they dislike.

Jackson showed her lack of class and skills on this one. (which makes me wonder who actually wrote her previous majority opinion). You can read the whole thing here. But here’s a couple parts–it sounds like a blog or X post rather than a Supreme Court dissent. And she threw down on her fellow Justices.

She additionally shows her contempt for the Constitution–the document she swore to uphold.

A Martian arriving here from another planet would see
these circumstances and surely wonder: “what good is the
Constitution, then?” What, really, is this system for protecting people’s rights if it amounts to this—placing the onus
on the victims to invoke the law’s protection, and rendering
the very institution that has the singular function of ensuring compliance with the Constitution powerless to prevent
the Government from violating it? “Those things Americans call constitutional rights seem hardly worth the paper
they are written on!”

Barrett’s response was epic. Here’s some bits:

We will not dwell on JUSTICE JACKSON’s argument, which is at odds with more than two centuries’ worth of precedent, not to mention the Constitution itself. We observe only this: JUSTICE JACKSON decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.

“No one disputes that the Executive has a duty to follow the law. But the Judiciary does not have unbridled authority to enforce this obligation—in fact, sometimes the law prohibits the Judiciary from doing so.”

It was a slapdown of major proportions, especially calling out Justice DEI by name. But it’s honestly less what this pile of steaming dissent deserved. Jackson both showed her ignorance of law and her contempt for her fellow Justices.



11 responses to “DEI SCOTUS Hire gets a well-deserved shellacking”

  1. Leftist, be they judges or otherwise, seldom hold the Constitution in the reverence they should.
    They use it when it serves their needs, and discard or ignore it when it is in their way.

    It is one of the many reasons folks like myself hold them in contempt.

    Like

  2. Nothing like being called a lazy ignorant person by one of your colleagues on the bench in a priceless shellacking that will stand the test of time and follow Justice Jackson for the next 20-30 years on the bench.

    So much for DEI hires on the SJC.

    Like

  3. Slap-fight in the SCOTUS parking lot to follow.

    Like

  4. B–To illustrate your point– Kagan, during the Autopen Administration, said that “It just can’t be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and leave it stopped for the years that it takes to go through the normal process.” They have brought the contempt on themselves.

    Nemo–Yeah, it was to the point for sure. Unfortunately there’s no way that Jackson will step down. Unless maybe she gets that role on Broadway she’s wanting.

    crazyeighter–I’d pay to see that…

    Like

  5. Jackson will never step down. She was not appointed to the court for her legal acumen – she knows this – she is a rubber stamp in the affirmative for any leftist legislation that comes across her desk. If anything, this public bitch-slapping of her by Barrett will only steel her resolve to go even farther to the left on the courts decisions. The best that we can hope for is for Sotomayor’s health to deteriorate to the point that she steps down, allowing Trump to replace her.

    Like

    1. Steve–You’re right on all counts.

      Like

  6. People love to hate on Taney as the worst justice ever onthe back of Dred Scott, it we currently have two justices on the court who are poor scholars, lazy and generally take up space. They are there because of their race. Sotomayor wakes up every day praising Gaia that Jackson was appointed. Now imagine – even with their issues – Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett being replaced with similar. That’s a horror movie epic.

    Like

  7. Jackson is an autopen appointment. She’s as legal an appointment as any of the other autopen EO’s, appointments and/or pardons.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Here’s an interesting question, if the FBI investigation into the theft of the 2020 election proves that it was stolen, does that negate Jackson’s appointment and force her removal from the bench? Assuming the question gets to the SJC is there a hearing before the eight other justices? How else may she get removed?

    Like

    1. Nemo–Hard to say since she was confirmed by the Senate. Kind of like what happens when they establish that the autopen was used without explicit permission by Biden. I’m not sure if she can be impeached for being stupid.

      Like

  9. Bear Claw Chris Lapp Avatar
    Bear Claw Chris Lapp

    Edited

    From MC–Nope. Even misspellings count.

    Like

Leave a Reply to Bear Claw Chris Lapp Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *