|
nChrist
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2016, 05:27:02 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 2-18-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
If Scalia’s passing means a 4-4 outcome, however, that’s where it becomes tricky.
Some argue that a tie vote would uphold the lower court’s ruling, but that’s not necessarily the case.
Tom Goldstein, Supreme Court practitioner and SCOTUSblog.com writer, initially concluded a tie would mean the lower court’s decision is “affirmed by an equally divided Court.” He later said his conclusion was wrong and wrote18, “There is historical precedent for this circumstance that points to the Court ordering the cases reargued once a new Justice is confirmed.”
In other words, the Court may hear oral argument again in both Friedrichs and Fischer once a new Justice is confirmed — which may not be until next term14.
As for cases yet to be argued this term, they will still be heard, but if the vote is tied, the justices may order the cases reargued at a later date.
In short, given what’s at stake as a whole for life and Liberty, the importance of Scalia’s untimely absence cannot be overstated. As we noted19 earlier this week, “With a series of 5-4 opinions from the High Court in recent years deciding the scope of our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, our First Amendment rights as pertains to political speech, the legal definition of marriage (and in the process putting our freedoms of religion, speech and assembly at risk), it is absolutely imperative that Republicans hold out for a strict constructionist in the mold of Scalia.”
Indeed, as Senator Ted Cruz warned20, “We are one justice away from a Supreme Court that will strike down every restriction on abortion adopted by the states. We are one justice away from a Supreme Court that will reverse the Heller decision, one of Justice Scalia’s seminal decisions that upheld the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms. We are one justice away from a Supreme Court that would undermine the religious liberty of millions of Americans.”
Cruz is right.
While the plaintiffs now before the Court may get a chance for a “do-over” if the Court orders their cases re-argued, once a new Supreme Court justice is confirmed, there is no do-over.
That’s why the words21 of Professor Robert P. George of Princeton University could not be truer: “We don’t need ‘balance’ on the Supreme Court, and Republicans should not claim that we do. We need faithful constitutionalists. Period.”
MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE
ANALYSIS: Obama’s Dangerous Cooked Intelligence22
Leftist Economists Balk at Bernie’s Spending Plans23
Nikki Haley: Marco Rubio Is the Man24
Trump Hits Cruz With Slanderous Attack25
College Students Confuse Reagan for Clinton and Nixon26
Congress Places Blame of Animas Spill on EPA27
One Small Bullet for the Brits, One Great Terror for ISIL28
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
Larry Elder: No, Mr. Trump, Bush Did Not Lie About Iraq War Intel29
Victor Davis Hanson: The Return of Appeasement, Collaboration and Isolationism30
Gary Bauer: Crushing the American Dream31
For more, visit Right Opinion32.
TOP HEADLINES
Obama Schedules Visit to Communist Cuba33
Clinton Email Discussed Afghan National’s CIA Ties34
Radioactive Material Stolen in Iraq Raises Security Fears35
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report36
OPINION IN BRIEF
Larry Elder: “It’s one thing to disagree with the decision to go to war in Iraq. That, believe it or not, was once a minority view. According to a Gallup poll taken in March 2003, the night after the Iraq war began, 76 percent supported President George W. Bush’s decision. Two months after the invasion, a Gallup poll found 79 percent of Americans thought the war was justified — about half of those said, ‘The war will be justified regardless of whether (weapons of mass destruction) are found.’ But in the last GOP debate, Republican candidate front-runner Donald Trump took things to a new level. He not only called the decision to go to war ‘a big, fat mistake’ (and, post-debate, proclaimed it ‘a disaster’) but also said: ‘They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none, and they knew there were none.’ … Accusing a commander in chief, irrespective of his or her party, of knowingly lying to start a war is serious business. In the Iraq War, almost 4,500 U.S. service members died, to say nothing of the war’s cost. To claim that the Bush administration knowingly lied to start the Iraq War is to assert that the CIA was behind 9/11 or that O.J. Simpson was innocent of double homicide. Facts don’t matter. Lack of evidence means presence of proof.”
SHORT CUTS
Insight: “A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.” —Barry Goldwater (1909-1998.)
For the record: “Starting … in the ‘20s with Woodrow Wilson, the government started getting involved in everything. It kept growing, metastasizing. By the time we got to the '60s, LBJ was saying, we the government are going to eliminate poverty. Now how did that work out? You know, $19 trillion later, 10 times more people on food stamps, more poverty, more welfare, broken homes, out-of-wedlock births, crime, incarceration. Everything is not only worse, it’s much worse. And that’s because it’s not their job. It’s our job. I wish the government would read the Constitution. I think that would probably help quite a bit. And maybe they did read it and maybe they got confused when they read the preamble, which says one of the duties is to promote the general welfare. They probably thought that meant putting everybody on welfare.” —Ben Carson
Belly laugh of the week: “I tell you what: If I would have run four years ago [Barack Obama] wouldn’t be president right now.” —Donald Trump (So by not running Trump still managed to screw us? Figures.)
Alpha Jackass: “Scalia’s death greatly boosts survival chances of Obama’s climate policy, all other humans.” —Slate’s Eric Holthaus
Singing a different tune: “Looking back on it, the president believes that he should have just followed his own advice and made a strong public case on the merits about his opposition to the [Supreme Court] nomination that President Bush had put forward. … What the president regrets is that Senate Democrats didn’t focus more on making an effective public case about those substantive objections. Instead, some Democrats engaged in a process of throwing sand in the gears of the confirmation process. And that’s an approach that the president regrets.” —Obama spokesman Josh Earnest
Braying Jenny: “It’s almost like [Republicans are] not being patriotic, it seems to me. … And I have to say it — I know it’s not popular to say it — but [Obama’s] color has something to do with it.” —talkinghead Joy Behar speculating on why the GOP objects to an Obama Supreme Court nominee
And last… “Slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment, a constitutional provision even many progressives are willing to respect as written.” —James Taranto
Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson
Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families. |
