Some say the courts are the final bulwark, Summoning my inner teenager, really? This S Court finds the verdict first, then reverse engineers the legal rationales. Even if they deign to defy this presidency, court orders will be ignored when necessary (Tik Tok), new EO on citizenship after being overruled by S Court… The court has no response outside of decorum and norms being followed which is exactly what this current administration has specifically been designed to tear down. This will go further than President Andrew Jackson saying “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”
When a toddler throws a temper tantrum (e.g., bulldozing the east wing in the middle of the night), you don't appease the toddler. All construction should stop until January 20, 2029 and then we can figure out how to clean up the mess. With the mass deportation of construction workers, those 250 will find something else to do.
This is really frustrating. Thanks for providing the real ammo to counter the partisan hackery of Bill Barr who attempts to give legal cover in the WSJ OP pages.
Pulverize it. (But I don't think anyone will, unless they made that a major campaign point and it resonated. 2 years is a long time, hopefully trump's unpopularity trend continues that long)
This is surreal . Roberts is enabling Don the Con, who has no Congress. Trump is unfit & the Heg should go. Please interview Barb McQuade. Get a full court press in vulnerable states …The photo banners adorning buildings, they must come down along with this clear & present danger unitary exec & adm . The White House was elegant like PM Carney but American statesmen need the people as Osshoff takes the stage. Encourage Katie Couric to put down her spoon & assemble a fleet with rolling pins; this is war. Keep up the good work. Full court press.
"The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the States." So saith the Constitution, but it's so often instructive to watch the originalist approach to that document fall apart when it crosses Trump's desires.
Maybe Roberts gave Trump a win because the chief justice sees the president's vanity project as relatively small potatoes, but it's also another instance where the law is revealed to be an option rather than a rule, and that is destructive in the long term.
It's a fallacy to call this the Roberts Court. David Brock in his persuasive book "Stench" calls it the Thomas Court. There are good reasons to call it the Alito Court.
The three despicables hang together, supported by a couple of playboy judges and Amy Coner Barrett, who is at least a believable jurist.
As presently constituted, this wretched ensemble is a disgrace to the Constitution. It is an omnishambles. It might as well simply rely on picking a single item off its list, squeeze it into the shadow docket, and let one of the three amigos come up with a one line semi-peanent, judgement.
Essentially, the Roberts Court (in the person of Roberts himself) has now said that any injunction by the lower courts can be stayed sine die. Thus, it is never necessary for the Court to decide in Trump's favour, but merely to take the entire judicial system out of gear. This is as preposterous as it is craven.
"A reckoning is overdue—not just for Trump and his cronies, but for the justices who continue to shamelessly condone his lawlessness."
Absolutely! And the first step toward such a reckoning next January should be the impeachment of John Roberts. Even without conviction by the Senate, impeachment could clearly present the case for the expansion of the Court, to follow as soon as possible. Extreme times require extreme measures...
Some say the courts are the final bulwark, Summoning my inner teenager, really? This S Court finds the verdict first, then reverse engineers the legal rationales. Even if they deign to defy this presidency, court orders will be ignored when necessary (Tik Tok), new EO on citizenship after being overruled by S Court… The court has no response outside of decorum and norms being followed which is exactly what this current administration has specifically been designed to tear down. This will go further than President Andrew Jackson saying “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”
Such a useful explanation, thank you.
When a toddler throws a temper tantrum (e.g., bulldozing the east wing in the middle of the night), you don't appease the toddler. All construction should stop until January 20, 2029 and then we can figure out how to clean up the mess. With the mass deportation of construction workers, those 250 will find something else to do.
This is really frustrating. Thanks for providing the real ammo to counter the partisan hackery of Bill Barr who attempts to give legal cover in the WSJ OP pages.
Please, please, please! Can we tear it down in 2029?
Pulverize it. (But I don't think anyone will, unless they made that a major campaign point and it resonated. 2 years is a long time, hopefully trump's unpopularity trend continues that long)
This is surreal . Roberts is enabling Don the Con, who has no Congress. Trump is unfit & the Heg should go. Please interview Barb McQuade. Get a full court press in vulnerable states …The photo banners adorning buildings, they must come down along with this clear & present danger unitary exec & adm . The White House was elegant like PM Carney but American statesmen need the people as Osshoff takes the stage. Encourage Katie Couric to put down her spoon & assemble a fleet with rolling pins; this is war. Keep up the good work. Full court press.
"The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the States." So saith the Constitution, but it's so often instructive to watch the originalist approach to that document fall apart when it crosses Trump's desires.
Maybe Roberts gave Trump a win because the chief justice sees the president's vanity project as relatively small potatoes, but it's also another instance where the law is revealed to be an option rather than a rule, and that is destructive in the long term.
It's a fallacy to call this the Roberts Court. David Brock in his persuasive book "Stench" calls it the Thomas Court. There are good reasons to call it the Alito Court.
The three despicables hang together, supported by a couple of playboy judges and Amy Coner Barrett, who is at least a believable jurist.
As presently constituted, this wretched ensemble is a disgrace to the Constitution. It is an omnishambles. It might as well simply rely on picking a single item off its list, squeeze it into the shadow docket, and let one of the three amigos come up with a one line semi-peanent, judgement.
In other words, I agree with the author.
Essentially, the Roberts Court (in the person of Roberts himself) has now said that any injunction by the lower courts can be stayed sine die. Thus, it is never necessary for the Court to decide in Trump's favour, but merely to take the entire judicial system out of gear. This is as preposterous as it is craven.
"A reckoning is overdue—not just for Trump and his cronies, but for the justices who continue to shamelessly condone his lawlessness."
Absolutely! And the first step toward such a reckoning next January should be the impeachment of John Roberts. Even without conviction by the Senate, impeachment could clearly present the case for the expansion of the Court, to follow as soon as possible. Extreme times require extreme measures...