There can’t be much doubt that liberal judges share some disdain for the Constitution. What else can explain Justice Breyer’s idiotic remarks about the Second Amendment on Fox News Sunday? The crux of Breyer’s argument is that James Madison didn’t really want the Second Amendment and only added it to help the Constitution get ratified. Ed Morrissey tries to make some sense of it all, but he falls short. It just doesn’t make any logical sense.
Finally, American Pundit points out the most obvious issue with Breyer’s argument; it doesn’t matter.
Who cares what Madison’s intent was? Who cares why the Second Amendment was added? Who cares what the motivation for its inclusion was? It’s there.
Is Breyer now saying that judges, including the Supreme Court, can ignore rights specifically guaranteed in the Constitution based upon the motivation for their inclusion? That judges can decide explicit rights don’t exist because they weren’t included in good faith? Wow.
To say that’s a dangerous precedent is probably the biggest understatement on this blog. That would mean a judge could decide you no longer have the right to free speech or freedom of the press because, hey, those rights were only included to appease one group needed for ratification.
I thought using international law and believing in a living constitution was bad. Now Supreme Court justices are misinterpreting original intent to bypass the Bill of Rights. Justice Breyer should be impeached and removed for this kind of crazy talk. What Justice Breyer is suggesting is a violation of his role as a Supreme Court justice. Supreme Court justices are required to take two oaths of office.
Oath 1:
“I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
When I was researching this I was horrified because I thought that might be the only oath they have to take. I’m not exactly sure why the above oath is even necessary. A Supreme Court justice’s job is simple: interpret the written Constitution.
Oath 2:
“I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
Justice Breyer is neither supporting nor defending the Constitution. In fact, it seems Breyer is more of an Oath 1 type of guy. Breyer’s comment are in opposition to the Constitution. He has a right to say whatever he wants but his comments are in violation of the oath. The American people should have some kind of recourse to remove these renegade justices. Unfortunately, nothing will be done about it and Justice Breyer will continue to make it up as he goes along.
If the liberal press had their way Texas Congressional nominee Kesha Rogers would be the new face of the Republican party. She’s wants the United States to get out of the United Nations. Plus, she wants to impeach the president? Why haven’t we heard of Rogers before? She’s a Democrat. Oops, there goes that talking point.
Rogers, 33, told TIME she is a “full time political activist” in the Lyndon LaRouche Youth Movement, a recruiting arm of the LaRouche political organization that is active on many college campuses. The LYM espouses LaRouche opposition to free trade and “globalism” (the UN, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund) and it also calls for a return to a humanist classical education, emphasizing the works of Plato and Leibnitz. On her professional looking campaign website, kesharogers.com, she touts the LaRouche political philosophy — a mix of support for the economic policies of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the impeachment of President Obama — and calls Obama a “London and Wall Street backed puppet” whose policies will destroy the Democratic Party. During the campaign, she was photographed carrying an oversized portrait of the President with a Hitler-style moustache penciled on his lip.
I can’t say I know much about Rogers political philosophy, but I must say I’m intrigued. The left is spending so much of its energy branding everyone on the right as crazy, but there’s more than enough to go around on the left.
Recent Comments