Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) has introduced the “No Kings Act” with great fanfare and the support of most of his Democratic colleagues. Liberal groups have heralded the measure to legislatively reverse the ruling in Trump v. United States. It is obviously popular with the press and pundits. It is also entirely unconstitutional in my view. The “No Kings Act” is not just a cynical abdication of responsibility by Democrats, but would constitute the virtual decapitation of the Constitution.
I have previously written about the false claims made about the Supreme Court’s decision by President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and other leading democrats. The press and pundits have reached a new level of sensationalism and hysteria in the coverage with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow even claiming that it was a “death squad ruling.”
The Trump Decision
The Court actually rejected the most extreme positions of both the Trump team and the lower courts.
As it has in the past, the Court adopted a three-tiered approach to presidential powers based on the source of a presidential action. Chief Justice John Roberts cited Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer, in which the court ruled against President Harry Truman’s takeover of steel mills.
In his famous concurrence to Youngstown, Justice Robert Jackson broke down the balance of executive and legislative authority between three types of actions. In the first, a president acts with express or implied authority from Congress. In the second, he acts where Congress is silent (“the zone of twilight” area). In the third, the president acts in defiance of Congress.
In this decision, the court adopted a similar sliding scale. It held that presidents enjoy absolute immunity for actions that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” while they enjoy presumptive immunity for other official acts. They do not enjoy immunity for unofficial or private actions.
Where the coverage has been wildly inaccurate, the No Kings Act is cynically dishonest.
To his credit, President Joe Biden was at least honest in proposing a constitutional amendment to overturn the decision in Trump. However, that was dead on arrival in Congress since under Article V it would require a two-thirds majority vote in both houses and then ratification by three-fourths of the states.
The Democrats are seeking to circumvent that process with simple majority votes with the No Kings Act.
The bill is being presented as a jurisdiction-stripping measure, not an effort to dictate outcomes.
Congress does have authority to change the jurisdiction of the federal courts. That authority was recognized by the Court itself in Ex parte McCardle (1869). Chief Justice Salmon Chase ruled that it did have the authority “to make exceptions to the appellate jurisdiction of this court.”
However, Chase also emphasized that the law did “not affect the jurisdiction which was previously exercised” so that prior decisions would remain fully enforceable.
Moreover, shortly after McCardle, the Court ruled in United States v. Klein (1871), that Congress may not use its authority of court jurisdiction to lay out a “rule of decision” for the Supreme Court, or effectively dictate results in court cases.
The No Kings Act
The No Kings Act does more than just strip jurisdiction and makes no secret of its purpose in dictating the outcome of future cases.
It purports in Section 2 to “clarify that a President or Vice President is not entitled to any form of immunity from criminal prosecution for violations of the criminal laws of the United States unless specified by Congress.”
That is a rather Orwellian view of “clarification” since it directly contradicts the opinion in declaring in the very next section that “[a] President, former President, Vice President, or former Vice President shall not be entitled to any form of immunity (whether absolute, presumptive, or otherwise) from criminal laws of the United States unless specified by Congress.”
Schumer and most of the Democratic senators actually believe that they can simply instruct lower courts to ignore a Supreme Court ruling on the meaning of the Constitution. It would undermine the basis of Marbury v. Madison after 221 years.
To be sure, it is stated in strictly jurisdictional terms. Yet, it crafts the jurisdictional changes to mirror the decision and future immunity claims.
The bill declares that federal courts “may not consider whether an alleged violation of any criminal laws of the United States committed by a President or Vice President was within the conclusive or preclusive constitutional authority of a President or Vice President or was related to the official duties of a President or Vice President unless directed by Congress.”
But the Democrats are not done yet. Section 4 actually removes the Supreme Court from such questions and makes appellate courts the effective highest courts of the land when it comes to presidential immunity:
“The Supreme Court of the United States shall have no appellate jurisdiction, on the basis that an alleged criminal act was within the conclusive or preclusive constitutional authority of a President or Vice President or on the basis that an alleged criminal act was related to the official duties of a President or Vice President.”
Notably, this is one of the wacky ideas put forward by the President’s Supreme Court Commission. After all, why pack the Court if you can just gut it?
Of course, some sponsors like Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) want to both pack the Court and strip it of authority. Presumably, once packed, the authority to act as a court would be at least restored with the liberal majority.
By making the D.C. Circuit (where most of these cases are likely to be litigated) the highest court of the land on the question, the Democrats are engaging in the rawest form of forum shopping. The D.C. Circuit is expected to remain in the control of Democratic appointees for years. (The Act expressly makes the D.C. courts the only place to bring a civil action in this area and states that “a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall be final and not appealable to the Supreme Court of the United States.”)
The Supreme Court of the United States shall have no appellate jurisdiction to declare any provision of this Act (including this section) unconstitutional or to bar or restrain the enforcement or application of any provision of this Act (including this section) on the ground of its unconstitutionality.
But wait there is more.
The No Kings Act reads like a fairy tale read by Democratic senators to their grandchildren at night. Not only would the evil conservative justices be vanquished by a lower court controlled by Democratic appointees, but the bill is filled with other wish list items from the far left. It would strip the Court of the ability to take other cases, to dismiss a criminal proceeding, to suppress evidence, and to grant a writ of habeas corpus, or “the Great Writ” that is the foundation of Anglo-American law for centuries.
The Democrats even legislatively dictate that any review of the law must meet a standard of its choosing. They dictate that “[a] court of the United States shall presume that a provision of this Act (including this section) or the enforcement or application of any such provision is constitutional unless it is demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that such provision or its enforcement or application is unconstitutional.” Thus, even the clear and convincing provision of the Act must be subject to a clear and convincing evidence review.
The Death of Marbury?
Again, Democrats are insisting that they are merely changing the jurisdiction of the Court and not ordering outcomes. However, the sponsors make clear that this is meant to “reaffirm that the President is not immune to legal accountability.” Sponsors like Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.) declared that “Congress has the power to undo the damage of this decision” by a “captured Court.”
The greatest irony is that the Democrats are practically reverting to the position of critics of Marbury v. Madison, who argued that the Framers never intended the Supreme Court to be the final arbiter of what the law means. That principle has been the touchstone of American law since 1803, but the Democrats would now effectively revert to the English approach under the guise of jurisdiction stripping legislation. Before the Revolution, the Parliament could dictate what the law meant on such cases, overriding the courts. On a practical level, the Democrats would regress to that pre-Marbury approach.
Marbury introduced a critical stabilizing element in our system that contributed greatly to the oldest and most successful constitutional system in history. Democrats would now toss much of that aside in a spasm of partisan anger. Calling the No Kings Act a jurisdiction stripping bill does not conceal its intent or its implications for our system.
It is all a rather curious position for the party that claims to be defending the rule of law. The No Kings Act would constitute a radical change in our constitutional system to allow popular justice to be meted out through legislative fiat.
Sponsors like Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., previously promised a “revolution” if the conservatives did not rule as the Democrats demanded. They have now fulfilled those threats, though few expected that they would undo the work following our own Revolution.
Just to be sure that the sponsorship of this infamous legislation is not soon forgotten, here are the senators willing to adopt this Constitution-destroying measure:
Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Jack Reed (D-RI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Tom Carper (D-DE), Peter Welch (D-VT), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Bob Casey (D-PA), Chris Coons (D-DE), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Ed Markey (D-MA), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Laphonza Butler (D-CA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Angus King (I-ME), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Gary Peters (D-MI), and Raphael Warnock (D-GA).
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” (Simon & Schuster).
And here’s how the fairy tale ends, “75 million Americans will happily turn themselves in to the gulag” OR there will be the kind of civil unrest we’ve not seen before. God help us then. The Court will be a much saner solution. Dems never ever had any intention of sharing this country
LISTEN —->
Former Democrat Illinois Governor Blagojevich reveals Obama-led machine behind coup to install Kamala as nominee:
“This is KGB Police-State style politics…if we don’t fix this: say goodbye to freedom in America because… The Obamas from the backroom control everything.”
https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1821554031178768767
It has been many months since I wrote in this blog response that we who are witnessing and watching what the leadership of the Democrat Party are blatantly trying to do to obtain maximum control over the 3 branches of our government, we may be compelled, sooner than later, to take actions — one of which is defensive: be sure to have enough Kevlar at home so when the bullets start flying, if they do, you’ll be protected — not kidding.
Neighborliness is voluntary. Socialism is coercive. The question to pose to Tim Walz is, “Does that difference matter to you?”
Excellent!
(OT)
“One person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.” (Tim Walz, expressing KH’s sentiment)
Here is that “neighborliness:”
You work “forty hours a week, then forty-eight, then fifty-six for your neighbor’s supper — for his wife’s operation — for his child’s measles — for his mother’s wheel chair — for his uncle’s shirt — for his nephew’s schooling — for the baby next door — for the baby to be born — for anyone anywhere around you — it’s theirs to receive, from diapers to dentures — and yours to work, from sunup to sundown, month after month, year after year, with nothing to show for it but your sweat, with nothing in sight for you but their pleasure, for the whole of your life, without rest, without hope, without end . . . From each according to his ability, to each according to his need . . .” (_Atlas Shrugged_, Ayn Rand)
That is not neighborly. That is cannibalism.
“Confused? That’s because these filings from Harris are irregular.”
Everything about Kamala’s campaign is irregular. Including Kamala.
“@LauraPowellEsq
UPDATE: Last night, Kamala Harris personally filed an updated Statement of Candidacy (aka Form 2) to designate Tim Walz as her running mate.
Since she used Biden’s personal candidate ID number (P80000722) instead of her own (P00009423), the FEC records are convoluted. Her newly filed Form 2 shows up on Biden’s personal FEC page. But if you look at the 2024 election cycle, Biden is erased and replaced with Harris, as if he was never never running for President.
Looking at Biden’s campaign committee’s FEC record, it’s now associated with both Biden’s and Harris’s candidacies for President for the period of 2020-2022. But that makes no sense, because Harris’s Presidential run in 2020 was never linked to Biden’s, and she ceased her campaign for President in 2020 and did not run again until 2024. Now Harris’s personal FEC candidate ID number (P00009423)—which is supposed to follow her for all Presidential campaigns for life—is somehow linked to Biden’s Presidential campaign in 2020. Only her Vice-Presidential campaign was ever linked to Biden’s, but that is separate from any Presidential campaigns.
The current 2023-2024 FEC record for “Biden for President” (aka “Harris for President,” ID number C00703975) is linked to two Presidential candidates. Both are both named “Kamala Harris.” One of these candidates is associated with Harris’s candidate ID number (P00009423), and the other “Kamala Harris” is associated with Biden’s candidate ID number (P80000722).
The Statement of Candidacy that Kamala Harris filed on July 29, using Biden’s personal candidate ID number (P80000722), now shows up under Harris’s ID number. But last night’s filing for that same candidate—number P80000722—shows up for the other “Kamala Harris” who is running for President. (Based on what happened previously, I suspect the FEC will shift these records in the future, to make it seem like there aren’t so many discrepancies between the names and the ID numbers.)
Confused? That’s because these filings from Harris are irregular. If Kamala Harris had used her own candidate ID number, like every other candidate in modern history, this wouldn’t have been so complicated, but then it would have been difficult to make the case that she’s entitled to Biden’s war chest. Undoubtedly, these filings are trying to circumvent those pesky campaign finance laws.
By the way, since Walz has never run for President, he doesn’t have his own FEC candidate ID for a Presidential run. According the the logic of Harris’s supporters, Walz is equally entitled to any funds from the campaign committee associated with ID number C00703975. And, just as Harris felt entitled to file an amended Statement of Candidacy using Biden’s personal candidate ID number because she was the Vice Presidential candidate, Walz could do the same, using Biden’s personal candidate ID number to run for President if he wanted to. The Democrats could pass this campaign down in perpetuity, without even obtaining the formal agreement of the prior candidate.
This reminds me of a system of government that isn’t considered anything like a democracy.”
“@DefiyantlyFree
First Jamie Raskin tells everybody in America that he’s going to invalidate the votes of at least 75 million America who vote for Donald Trump by not certifying a Trump victory and then Joe Biden is warning America that we are not going to have a peaceful transition of power.
Then you have the election integrity project, which is run and funded by Soros and other globalist leftist America haters who are doing war games about how to properly invoke the insurrection act and what the military can do to stop Trump “the authoritarian.”
And somehow, this is not the biggest story in America right now.
You have a political party that is plotting to literally overthrow our Democratic voting process and the media wants to discuss how JD Vance is weird.
If you are OK with the complete and total dismantling of our constitutional Republic because some idiot on CNN told you to hate Trump, then you are the actual Nazi fascist dictator that you keep telling us Trump is.”
Everything that you describe in your comment is legal and constitutional.
JUST AS IT WAS FOR TRUMP IN 2020 and Clinton in 2016.
It is highly unlikely to be successful.
Rep. Raskin is CORRECTLY noting that Congress is NOT required to certify the election of a President.
What he fails to grasp is that the american people are free to petition their congressmen to refuse to certify an election,
And therefore there was no insurection on J6 and everyone associated with J6 should be released., and all prosecutions stopped.
I’m not sure I follow you here. The certification process is a Constitutional described process… the counting of the electoral college vote may not culminate in a candidate obtaining a majority, but every member of congress must dutifully participate in the certification process. And if no candidate gets a majority, then the house of representative will find chose a President by the procedures described in the Constitution and the Senate will chose the Vice-President, under the same authority, which happen will also become the President of the Senate. You can always petition your representative of the House or Senator to act this or that way, but he must obey to the Constitution’s framework and the rejuvenated Electoral Vote Count Act.
Each member of Congress must in his best of conscience retire in his respective chamber and discuss any opposition on any Electoral college vote of any state and vote in good faith with the best of his conscience haven taken an oath of office respecting the Constitution…
So I don’t follow your point here… The members of Congress are quite constrained in the hole process by duties and not by the wish of their local constituents, but by something quite larger which is not, as you infer, arbitrary..
There was no insurrection, but not for the reasons you imply. There was a riot, because we are not aware of any proof that there was a coordinated and/or premeditated desire to make an uprising or that the events, without complicity or premeditation, ever evolved to create an insurrection (this second eventuality usually means that the whole thing lasted some time, like many days at least, enough for a reasonable person to come to his senses).
The question I have is why is this guy still pushing war, changes to the Constitution etc.?
Was this not the guy that just got shown to be non compos mentis in front of the entire world and had to resign the campaign in front of the whole world because of it?
Is this not the guy who the special counsel found to be of diminished capacity and therefore not fit to go to trial against?
So why is he not a “Lame Duck” President now? Why is he making any policy military or any important decisions or initiatives?
Why are we not seeing him being reined in?
Right, there is no reining in. More like they’re just letting him do whatever he wants to do – or not do.
No pressing questions from any media about the economy, inflation, troops, WAR –or anything.
No 25th Amendment push?
Where are Republicans? They are MIA.
Why did James Comer and Republicans NOT impeach Biden for his bribes and treason?
Why did they not highlight decisions Biden made that clearly benefited China?
Why are they all afraid to open the door to scrutiny of Ukraine corruption?
Why did James Comer and Jim Jordan let the impeachment fizzle to nothing?
There was plenty of evidence to impeach, or at least drag Biden’s public corruption scandals into the news, daily.
Instead, they pulled their punches and Bribery Biden goes away unscathed?
What they hell is wrong with Comer and GOP?
Where is Senate GOP leadership?
For the GOP to be this passive and complicit is political malpractice.
All of them are derelict and corrupt to the core.
No impeachment of Biden for the Open Border.
They impeached Mayorkas over the border.
Then let Chuck Schumer just ‘cancel’ the impeachment trial for Mayorkas. No GOP pushback on the issue? WTH?
Mayorkas is behind the decisions to deny Trump of SS protections that allowed for the assassination “inside job.”
There is NO PUSH by GOP to DO ANYTHING to hold ANYONE in the Biden Regime accountable. NOTHING.
They are on vacation until second week of September.
For shame on all of them.
Also, Hunter Biden was found guilty and convicted at his trial.
Hunter gets to wait over five months before sentencing AFTER the election? He should ALREADY be in prison.
So should Trump.
“The current constitutional crisis in America will only stop when Republican politicians arrest and prosecute and jail Democrats.
If anyone asks about the crime, just tell them: “falsifying bank records.”
If you believe that then you’re either part of the system or part of the problem.
But there were no bank records involved – the alleged crime is lying to yourself in your diary – and even that is not a fellony, it is a misdemeanor past the statute of limitations.
To convert it into a felony – you need lying to yourself in your private diary for the purpose of influencing an election that was already over. And even that is insufficient because influencing an election – with or without a time machine is legal.
Lying to influence an election is legal – or are we to Send Joe to Jail for lying about the laptop ?
I would further note that – both the Enmoron case and the Merchan case are alleged Frauds.
And SCOTUS has already correctly established that Fraud is a property crime.
YOU cited falsifying bank records. But falsifying bank records is not inherently a crime.
To be a crime – you must be committing fraud – using deception to take something that belongs to someone else.
You would not call it falsifying bank records if someone misreported the menu choices at a board of directors meeting.
Fraud requires more than just lying.
It requires lying in order to obtain property that is not yours.
There was no fraud in the enmoron case.
There was no fraud in the Merchan case.
Both of these will be vacated – the only question is who quickly and which of dozens of excellent legal and constitutional reasons will be the one that results in the verdict being vacated.
My bet is the Merchan case is reversed on presidential immunity grounds – Merchan allowed witnesses and testimony that SCOTUS has determined is inadmissible.
That would be a win on a legal technicality. Where tossing the case because there was no fraud would be a win on the merits, but that will take longer.
Judge Merchan belongs in prison.
“Peachy Keenan
@KeenanPeachy
The memory holing of Trump getting shot feels like perhaps proof it was a planned operation that went terribly awry and the less said the better.”
“Sean Davis
@seanmdav
Sure looks that way. Immediately swapping out Biden afterward was also a major tell.”
These are all valid questions. The ones deceived and deceiving themselves call them conspiracy theories but they’re not theories at all.
They’re simply valid questions that no one seems to be able to answer.
This was in response to the first anonymous comment, not the second one btw.
What are the legal ramifications of senile, non composmentis Biden signing anything?
His signature by auto pen is legally fine and dandy?
Please don’t forget that black people can’t be racist. When Bush lost her election she blamed in on the Jew money. Racist enough for you?
Walz has said that speech is allowed if it’s not disinformation and he gets to decide what disinformation is. Stalin couldn’t have said it any better.
Let’s have a laugh while learning something. Don’t miss this!
https://x.com/DefiyantlyFree/status/1821167291343442325
The sad part is that is probably a true playbook of how they will get the whore in.
It’s funny as long as you can convince yourself it’s an exaggeration…otherwise…
“31% of Republicans say vaccines are more dangerous than diseases they prevent”
https://arstechnica.com/?p=2041522
I’m sorry, these have to be the dumbest people in the world. Why? I wish polio on nobody. But give me a break, are we going to see a resurgence of polio in the U.S.? Mumps? Measles? I fully expect to see kids die from one of the diseases prevented by MMR. It is just a matter of time. The really, really sad thing here is the kids of these idiots will get it and spread it to immune compromised kids that are unable to take the vaccine. I find it disgusting you would inflict a disease like Measles or Mumps, or polio on your own child. But at the first sign your kid is ill, keep him home so you don’t kill your neighbors kid. Killing your neighbors kid because of your ignorance is criminal.
31% of Republicans say vaccines are more dangerous than diseases they prevent
you’ll believe anything won’t you??
Please, don’t have kids
Do you not believe the statistic?
Check out…
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/coverage/schoolvaxview/data-reports/index.html
It is only a matter of time before we have a major outbreak. Bummer that the parents of these people that don’t believe in vaccines had the same belief. They’d all would have died as kids.
Your source proves that 90% of people have their children vaccinated. So you believe that the remaining ten percent of those who don’t have their children vaccinated are all Republicans. If theres any way to support your position you’ll be sure to find it. The problem is that the source that you have provided has obviously refuted the premise of your comment. You can’t refute the fact that even after receiving the Covid vaccine and all the boosters people are still getting Covid. I have a question. Have you said one single word of concern over illegal aliens who are entered the country without any proof of having received any vaccinations. Didn’t think so.
ANY objective SHALLOW dive into simply the corrupt process of the FDA, WHO, CDC, etc in the trials and approval process for vaccines would IMMEDIATELY discover it is a rigged game… it is probably impossible to tell the REAL efficacy of ANY vaccine (or drug) becaue of how obfuscated and slanted the process is…
but, yeah, the c0v1d xvax is a bio-weapon, you nimrod, a slow motion holocaust to weed out the volunteer guniea pigs…
Kill your own damn kid, do not send your measles infected kid to school. Home school your unvaccinated children. You have no concern for the immune compromised among us.
How heartless the Repos have become. I thought you believed in the sanctity of life? BS, you are dumb as rocks. Kill your own unvaccinated kids, keep them out of society.
Please donty have kids, moron. Please.
If Darwin is right, they’ll have no chance anyway.
Statistics I believe. Your ignorant lies, not so much. I know a shit ton of Republicans, and ALL of their kids are vaccinated.
Spastic idiot, please don’t have kids.
When I was a kid back in the 1950’s, all of us in elementary school got the measles, etc., stated home until recovered, and DIDN’T DIE, but just returned to school. If enough kids were out sick to make it problematic to continue the curriculum, the entire class or even school would shut down temporarily. When, historically, kids were dying after catching the measles was way back when the public water and sewage systems were inadequate, and once those public works projects progressed to modern standards, deaths from measles even before there was a vaccine became quite rare. I remember clearly that parents would purposely expose their kids to other sick children to assure they would be infecred, because the immunity would be life-long, and if you were not immune from childhood, but got sick for the first time as an adult, the repercussions were known to be much more serious.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Covid shot is not a vaccine
RWS — Sorry, all the responsible sources can the medication a vaccine.
Disorganized and incoherent speech can be a sign of hebephrenic schizophrenia. You may want to have that looked at.
Failing to recognize David made a typo and meant to write “call” rather than “can” is a sign of stupidity.
No. I caught the typo. I just enjoy needling David.
“Responsible” of course meaning responsible for perpetrating a lie.
The mRNA vaccine is a vaccine, Roger. Nice try attempting to look clever. Also, gravity exists, a republic is a form of democracy, and Bigfoot is a myth.
No it is not if you use the real definition.
“a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease”. The experimental medical treatment does not do this.
Well, in your case, I suppose getting a couple or so right out of 4 is as much as can be expected…
True Roger. Well it is when they change the definition.
Absolutely correct. The Fauci-irte Big Pharma-captured bureaucrats changed the definition of “vaccine” to fit the mRNA gene therapy. Read 1984 to learn more about bureaucracies that change the definitions of words to fit ideologies rather than reality…
31% of people believe polls they see online.
Also, equating misinformation regarding a polio vaccine with what the Dems have done with social media and political speech is why the term slippery slope was invented.
Ooh, ooh, someone said that Salk’s vaccine is harmful, shut down all conservatives on Facebook.
Anyone who ignores reading readily available scientific literature written for the public from sources such as the New England Journal of Medicine, Johns Hopkins, the Mayo Clinic, the Cleveland Clinic and about 60 other similar outlets, but instead takes their info from FOX, Russell Brand or Joe Rogan is an utter moron.
The Salk vaccine did not work and many people died because of it. The Sabin vaccine corrected the problems with the Salk vaccine.
Saved
67 readability score
“The Salk vaccine did not work and many people died because of it. “
@ Veslow53: The Sabin vaccine replaced the Salk vaccine, but the Salk vaccine worked and wasn’t the killer veslow53 suggests. Such nonsense is what we hear from those posting under the name anonymous and those anonymous people who sometimes post under a name to add validity to their claims.
Eleven died of an infected batch, but most of the children in the early years received the Salk vaccine. So many doses had already been given when the Sabin vaccine was available that the trials had to be done in Eastern Europe.
The above post is so off the wall that the drunkard might have posted it.
Try paying close attention to the actual research that is explained by RFK, Jr. and read the papers he cites.
Professor Turley,
You claim that Roberts adopted the “zone of twilight” concept from Jackson’s concurrence in Youngstown and applied it to Trump v. United States. However, this is not what Roberts did at all.
Once we leave the zone of exclusive presidential power, we enter an area where the authorities of Congress and the president overlap – this is the “zone of twilight” under Jackson’s concurrence in Youngstown. As Jackson explained, difficult questions can arise in this space when the president acts in the absence of congressional approval. This area (per Jackson) is an area where Congress is presumed competent to act, and thus where the president’s conduct is subject to regulation by Congress.
Barrett makes this point in her concurrence: “[T]he Constitution does not vest every exercise of executive power in the President’s sole discretion . . . Congress has concurrent authority over many Government functions, and it may sometimes use that authority to regulate the President’s official conduct, including by criminal statute.”
On this understanding, there should be no general immunity for official presidential acts falling outside the limited zone of exclusive presidential authority. There is no basis for presumptive immunity (or absolute immunity; note the Court did not decide which was appropriate for non-core official acts). If anything, the presumption should run the other way: In areas where executive action is subject to congressional regulation, Congress should generally be able to regulate that action by criminal statute if it chooses. There is no basis in the separation of powers to exclude presidential conduct from that understanding.
To claim that presumptive immunity is grounded in Jackson’s Youngstown concurrence is simply incorrect. This was the most significant failing of the Trump opinion. It recognized that this immunity concept was not grounded in the Constitution, but then it relied entirely on false citations to disguise the fact that this concept was entirely created by the Roberts Court.
For anyone that disagrees, I would love to see a citation to Jackson’s concurrence in Youngstown that states a President cannot be regulated by Congress in this middle zone of twilight. To help, here is the zone of twilight paragraph that Roberts and Turley refer to:
“2. When the President acts in absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority, he can only rely upon his own independent powers, but there is a zone of twilight in which he and Congress may have concurrent authority, or in which its distribution is Uncertain. Therefore, congressional inertia, indifference or quiescence may sometimes, at least as a practical matter, enable, if not invite, measures on independent presidential responsibility. In this area, any actual test of power is likely to depend on the imperatives of events and contemporary imponderables rather than on abstract theories of law.”
Hey dumb ass anonymous. Turley is NEVER going to read what you wrote. If you wish to disgree with him, I suggest you email him directly.
I am sure he is anxious to hear your brilliant thoughts on the subject.
Incorrect. He has revised his columns before after I have pointed out errors.
Did you have anything substantive in response?
How do you know it was he who made the revisions?
More to the point, if changes/corrections were made after initial publication, how would we know the motivation? I strongly suspect that Turley would state an acknowledgement if making a correction to a mistake pointed out by a reader. I also strongly suspect that you are correct: Turley doesn’t read the comments, much less use them to identify errors he has made; and the poster claiming otherwise is either hallucinating, self-delusional in some other way, or merely a pathetic liar trying desperately to massage his own ego (while he simultaneously massages another appendage).
EXACTLY
Dear pseudo-lawyer, The “zone of twilight” paragraph you reference does NOT support your inference. The very final sentences make that clear: “Therefore, congressional inertia, indifference or quiescence may sometimes, at least as a practical matter, enable, if not invite, measures on independent presidential responsibility. In this area, any actual test of power is likely to depend on the imperatives of events and contemporary imponderables rather than on abstract theories of law.”
Moreover, pseudo-lawyer, you should know that “concurrences” are NOT controlling part of the resultant decision/opinion.
For anyone reading this, anonymous is simply expressing his opinion, for that, we will accept it.
Those final sentences do not mean that the Executive Branch presumptively or absolutely Trump’s the Legislative Branch. Rather it should be based on the facts and circumstances of the situation, not some abstract legal rule (such as blanket immunity). Nothing in those sentenced justifies placing the burden on Legislative Branch, and certainly if facts and circumstances must determine what to do, Jackson would not approve of Justice Roberts limiting access to evidence to allow for the fact-based determination to occur.
Do you have a cite to anything else in the concurrence?
No he hasn’t you douchebag. At best, his site admin did. Get a grip, dude.
Do I? Why would you ask me? You addressed Turley, little a little spastic kunt.
*like
I have 2 points to reply.
1. I think you failed to read “exclusive” next to the immunity umbrella. Where the President exercises Exclusive Constitutional Authority…which means that any authority which is shared with Congress doesn’t have full Immunity protection, as you very well explained.
2. What does “Presumptive” mean? My reading is that a presumptive immunity could be challenged but the Onus of Probability must be higher than in the normal carrying of justice. I asked the question on an earlier comment, but I’m not sure anyone will answer. A grand jury process is something which is rarer and raises the bar on the threshold of the Onus of Probability for getting an indictment. Is this what is inferred? I have no idea.
Bye Bye Bush!
Represent your constituents or find another line of work.
You call that “work”? You must lead an extremely sheltered existence.
I don’t work much, if thats what you mean.
For those of you in Rio Linda, a recession is two consecutive quarters of decline in a country’s inflation-adjusted gross domestic product.
America is not in a recession.
Inflation must be reduced to the Trump 2% level.
Are you suggesting we have another pandemic? If you understood economics, you would understand that the pandemic lockdowns resulted in massive oversupply. People purchased less. Manufacturers slowed their manufacturing in response, in order to clear the product funnel. Supply chains were also disrupted. When the pandemic ended, supply had been pulled back and demand was high, thus prices rose. It had NOTHING to do with who was president.
“American Action Forum estimates that if the Green New Deal (GND) is enacted, every American household would pay $65,000 per year to foot the bill and that the total price tag could reach $93 trillion in the first 10 years alone.”
– Congressional Western Caucus
You still managed to grossly underestimate the impact of the lockdowns. The disruption of which you speak caused massive damage to the private “infrastructure” that is the foundation of the U. S. economy; damage that will take decades to repair, if that ever even happens.
Why did Trump order the lockdowns?
LMAO
Because he was stuck in a lose-lose situation created by the deep state and professional bureaucrats… Do the lock down, you lose, don’t do it and all deaths will be blamed on you…
So in your mind the TRILLIONS that Biden spent after the pandemic was over had zero effect on inflation????
Also, the reason the nation shut down for so long was due to DEMOCRAT governors wanting to crush the economy during Trump’s re-election run. If the nation went as FL, GA, SD, TX and a few other red states went we would have been much better off. But fascist pigs like WALZ, Newsome, Whitmore and Cuomo shut it all down for a year or more.
It sure did have something to do with dementia Jo. He attacked the oil industry and caused gas prices to to sky rocket. This affect the cost of everything, many times.
In 2022, the U.S. economy met the technical definition of a recession, but the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis did not consider it an official recession due to other factors, such as a low unemployment rate
Welcome to the new order, dipshit.
The reason the US Treasury yield curve predicts a recession that hasnt yet occurred is GOVERNMENT SPENDING which artificially raised GDP for the last 2 years.
“It’s the [QUARTERS], stupid!”
– James Carville
Its the [WTF} stupid
Except under Obama, when media/Democrats refused to recognize that definition in effect.
As a Poli Sci major, I have witnessed the now complete move of the whole party of Democrats to a Parliamentary System which Obama approved through continuing resolutions, Presidential Orders, and laws written for the Department to write and regulate. They have effectively adopted the European Socialist System and melded in their communistic/Euro Socialist views into their party. The dismissal of the US as a Constitutional Republic is their end game.
melded their views “into their party” ….and into the government, the department of justice, etc.
Obama was busy ‘fundamentally transforming’ the country for 8 years, now these 4 years, and once they install puppet Kamala, their ‘end game’ will be completed.
You aren’t doing very well in school.
JT on his Twitter/X account said…
Not a promising start for campaign tenor. Gov. Walz just referred to the false couch claim involving Vance. He referred Vance on a couch and said “he really did that” before adding that he is “weird as hell.”…
I am guessing JT didn’t fact check Trump for the past 8 years because it would have been a full time job. with 10s of thousands of lies over the past 8 years that makes us quite the undertaking.
Joe Biden is a pathological liar.
61 lies at the debate to Trumps 30.
Joe Biden is twice the liar trump is.
Now it appears Walz is too.
Next??
Do you have proof Biden told 61 lies?
I listed them here. Go back and look. He told 15 in the first 6 minutes. His rate only slowed because he forgot how to talk.
Maybe you did maybe you didn’t. Interesting that you didn’t list them in your reply. All it would have taken is a ½ second paste. But, you failed.
“All it would have taken is a ½ second paste”
Hogwash you numbskull.. You think I have them in my back pocket or saved on my computer like Gigi’s daily rant? I’ll not search for them. You can feel free to, if you dont know how to download the transcript and count them yourself. So maybe I did and maybe I did.
Fail.
LOL, you didn’t. You just made it up.
Prove it, spastic.
Brilliant!
And so explosively effective!
What a ——- idiot!
The FACT CHECKERS DISAPPEARED when it came to checking Biden’s BRAZEN, SERIAL LYING.
They never even Fact Checked Biden’s LIES about the Supreme Court he told on prime time TV.
The media and fact checkers exist ONLY to carry water for Democrats.
The FACT CHECKERS have nothing to say when it comes to the professional liar named Kamala.
The press isn’t even pressing Biden or Harris to ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS!
They just says “oh well, ho hum” and go back to attacking Republicans and Trump.
They conducted a COUP to oust Biden.
Avoided the press.
Installed Kamala as the “candidate”.
Avoided the press.
ZERO MEDIA SCRUTINY of their MUTINY.
The media are acting AS IF this is all NORMAL.
IT IS NOT.
OUR GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER BY A COUP
Democrats have UP-ENDED ‘our democracy’.
Kamala has NO POLICY POSITIONS on her campaign website. No pressure to explain ANYTHING.
She is LYING to voters. Walz is a professional liar as well.
It is almost as if they KNOW the election will be rigged for them.
Kamala has answered ZERO QUESTIONS about WHEN she knew Biden was non compos mentis.
Or about her campaign. Or about her policies. Or what she would do about ANYTHING!
NO MEDIA PRESSURE ON THE DEMOCRATS — at all!
Biden has been turning his back on reporters for 4 years!
The media are CARRYING DEMOCRATS to the election and will LIE for them all the way.
We have lost the country to a Communist Coup.
Keep trying. You’ll get your G.E.D. eventually.
Everything said IS happening. Wake up, useful idiot.
But you, stop trying. Your G.E.D. is a fantasy.
This is what the Biden/Harris government is doing. Open Borders. Flying tens of millions of illegal aliens all over the country. Housing illegal aliens for free, filling up entire hotels, paying them, giving them everything for free. Majority are military age young men from all over the world. What is going on? Watch what is happening in UK. That is what’s coming here.
https://x.com/JJCarrell14/status/1820999884243079352
btw, the Coup began in 2016 as soon as Trump won and they haven’t stopped since.
“…as soon as Trump won…”
I guess they let special ed students have access to the internet.
And booger eating drunktards too apparrently
Why out yourself like that?
Reading comprehension issues too, or is it the cooking sherry talking again?
Democrats ARE the insurrectionists.
Lets examine a couple of lies.
Trump said at the debate that he had “the beat economy ever”. To prove him wrong one would need to examine 250 years of economic indicators, and even then, the results would be subjection. One thing most any economist agrees on, low inflation plus steady growth is a great economy. Anything else is a shit economy.
Now lets take a look at Bidens lie:
He saiid unemployment was 15% when he came into office, and that “there were no jobs.
How hard was it to find out that 6.4% was the unemployment rate when Biden was sworn into office.
And how hard is it to know without looking that unemployment was not 100% (no jobs).
Your “fact checkers” say Trump lies and Joe exaggerates. You tell me which is which.
Spastic idiot.
Lets see, is the guy who had “sex with a couch”, which of course is not possible, the weirdo? Or is it the VP hopeful who thinks thats a good topic for a campaign rally??
Tim Walz had sex with a folding lawn chair. It really happened. That guy is weird.
That was easy.
Trump lies like a sleazy used car salesman. His followers LOVE it!
Kamala lies on her back. Democrats love it.
Everyone lies on their backs, their sides, etc.
Thats a lie
“The “No Kings Act” is not just a cynical abdication of responsibility by Democrats, but would constitute the virtual decapitation of the Constitution.”
– Professor Turley
_____________________
The “decapitation of the Constitution” took place in 1860 when “Crazy Abe” Lincoln decided that because secession is not prohibited, secession is prohibited.
“Crazy Abe” threw the baby out with the bathwater; he threw the Constitution out with reprehensible slavery.
Lincoln forcibly imposed martial law, seized all power by kinetic force, and established his dictatorship with a gun to America’s head.
In a society of laws, the laws must be stringently adhered to.
Execrative slavery was “withering on the vine” in the Western world and must have been legislatively abrogated.
Lincoln engendered a society of violence and despotism, the arbitrary incoherence of which persists to this day through the antithetical and unconstitutional principles of communism that progressively filled the vacuum that Lincoln created and nature so abhors.
Every act of Lincoln, subsequent to his illicit denial of secession, was and remains invalid, illegitimate, illicit, and unconstitutional by extension and must be corrected, reversed, and abrogated, with emphasis on the improperly ratified, unconstitutional, and Marxist “Reconstruction Amendments.”
America must be “fundamentally transformed” squarely back onto the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Yes, Lincoln was a pragmatic fascist… any surprise he was .LGBTQ… LGBTQ has nothing much to do with sexual orientation or identity, it’s mostly a feminist lobbying group. Yes, it’s a disputed theory, but most probably, he shows the signs of being a “B”… Bisexual are the most violent on partner relationships. Many expressions of fascism celebrate openly Bisexuality… just look at the Nazi’s Brown Shirt history.
But what I find most interesting is the fact that the 2no kings act” is written by a Party which always wish to be more Like Canada… where the parliamentary system is overlooked by a British Monarch.
In fact, since the whole “hope” about this Act is, as Schumer pointed out, is to take immunity from Trump’s Jan 6 actions, I wonder when Trump claims wrongly that “the U.S. is a Republic, Not a Democracy…” I wonder if what he really means is rather that the U.S. is a Republic not a Parliamentary System. Academics have noted a long time ago that Republics tend to evolve in time towards Parliamentarism and Vice Versa… Parliamentarism tends to evolve towards Republicanism. This usually means that in a Republics, as directed by Pelosi’s Congress, the Legislative wants to integrate the Executive within within its own, and in a Parliamentary system like under Justine Trudeau, the Prime Minister doesn’t want any Check and Balances on his actions and government…. But the US is a democracy even if its a republic… As I tweeted to Trump the Republic is a structure, democracy is its Process. Democracy is imprinted in all the processes of the Constitution. No People may be Sovereign if the Processes are not Democratic. It’s just sad that the Democrats have stopped obeying to Democratic Processes under Obama and turned to socialist populist authoritarianism and never looked back.
Kamala Harris is not a natural born citizen.
Kamala Harris is ineligible to be president.
She was born in Oakland, CA to foreign born parents, both in the U.S. on student visas.
They were foreign nationals when she was born, neither parent was a citizen.
She was raised in Canada. She is not a victim. She is not oppressed.
She is not marginalized. She is privileged.
She is disqualified!
DO NOT ACCEPT THIS IMPOSTER FRAUD
Kamala’s grandfather was a slave owner, a plantation owner.
Kamala’s is a direct descendant of slave owners.
SHE is the privileged spawn of upper class slave owners.
Kamala is a race-hustling fraud exploiting her blackness.
Kamala is portraying herself as “marginalized” for personal gain.
She is a professional liar, a con artist, a scammer, a schemer, a Leftist, America-hating Commie POS.
It doesn’t matter who is running against Trump. You’d come up with the filthiest hatred you could come up with to back up your “reasoning.”
Pretty much. A decent libturd is hard to come by.
Like tulsi, they figure it out.
Kamala is STILL the sitting Vice President and “acting” co-President, spending all her time on her own campaign all day long every day speaking AS IF she has NOT been in office for these past 3.5 years.
The hate, the lies, the chaos comes from the left. All of it.
Speaking as if SHE, as de facto POTUS, cannot DO something NOW while she has 6 months left in office.
Why do people sound like morons when they ignore Trump’s malignant narcissistic lying?
MORON ^^^^
anony…..Kam’s father is just half-black……her mother is 100% Asian Indian………so she is only one-fourth black….correct?
She is ‘Obama the fraud’ all over again.
Why is no one doing the VETTING of this FRAUD imposter “candidate”?
DO NOT ALLOW THE COMMUNISTS TAKE OVER OF OUR COUNTRY!
What we need to stop are people running the country who are too stupid to understand what communism actually is and use the term as a brash epithet.
Having two US citizen parents is one way to get citizenship, but not the only one. She was born in the US and thus a citizen.
She’s not a “natural born citizen”.
“She’s not a ‘natural born citizen’.”
What a moronic argument.
https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-born-citizen-clause-requires.html?m=1
She is NOT a Natural Born Citizen. She is a citizen because she was born on US Soil, but a Natural Born Citizen is one whose parents are citizens. It’s not where you were born, it is who you born to. My children were born in Germany while both my husband and I were serving in the US Army, they are considered Natural Born Citizens and not German citizens. It’s a blood line thing because our founders wanted loyalty to the US. Anchor babies are not natural born.
Just curious, but are US military bases considered US territory, like embassies are?
NATURAL BORN CITIZEN
The Jay/Washington letter proposed and the Framers included in the Constitution the mandate that the President be a “natural born citizen.”
The Constitution did not define “natural born citizen.”
Blackstone wrote only of “natural born subjects” within the context of kings, lieges, and ligeance, the territory subject to a liege.
The only definition of “natural born citizen” was written by Vattel.
The Law of Nations, 1758, “has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting,…,” Ben Franklin wrote in his letter to Charles Dumas from the Continental Congress in 1775.
_____________________
The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)
Emmerich de Vattel
Book 1, Chapter 19, Section 212
Citizens and natives
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
I’d rather have King Trump than the politburo managed by schumer, obamma, dnc-lackeys, and the military/big Ag/Pharma/Tech/sexual deviance-industrial complexes
Could someone explain how the Republican Party stands on this issue?
Republican Party, the ultimate RINOs. Reagan would not recognize the stupid hillbilly right wing extremist mess it has become.
Steaming turd ^^^^
You mean the Reagan that your party vilified in the exact same way?
Spastic idiot
OT
Kamalasalad-Tampon Tim 2024!
Beg to differ: “Kamala Sutra – Tampon Tim” FIFY! You’re welcome…
CHUKKY SCHOOER AND HIS TRIBE NEED ROPE AND A BULLET TO BACK OF HIS HEAD.
Gotta wonder why Turley supports your right wing extremist violent rhetoric.
“Kamala Sutra Salad – Tampon Tim” 2024!
Kama-lalaland–Tampex Rex
I misspelled “Tampax”…..but I had to!
Kama-Lama-Ding-Dong and Tampon Tim?
At least we all agree on Tampon Tim!
You just brought the collective IQ of the right wing extremist commenters on here to 36!
Not a Rocky Sharp and the Replays fan, I take it.
I wondered how long you it would be before emotionally-immature MAGAs would throw out the “Tampon Tim” meme. Do you know where this came from? Gov. Walz supported a bill that required menstrual products to be placed in school bathrooms where there are students between grades 4 through 12. Since then, 30 states have passed similar measures. Now, explain to me how or why it is a bad thing for school-age girls to have free menstrual products available to them or why you would think this is something Gov. Walz should be insulted over? Most Americans support this. Even when I was a child, the Mother’s Club at my parochial school paid for a medicine cabinet to be installed in girls’ restrooms to be filled with free menstrual products available for girls to use. When girls first start having periods, they are often irregular, so they don’t always know when to expect them. Nowadays, girls often don’t even carry purses. I am dumbfounded that you MAGAs would think this is a bad thing or a cause to mock Gov Walz.
He put them in Boys’ Rooms, bone-head.
Gigi the fvcktard doesnt know that he put them in the BOYS BATHROOM.
whats that bathroom called again??
Gigi is a spastic idiot.
You can get angrier than this. Come on. Get angry for Donald. Let the hate spew.
Calling Gigi a fvcktard indicates anger to you?? LMAO at your stupidity as well. Thats a compliment for Gigi. She obviously appreciates the feedback bwahahahahahahaha
Come on, you can be more stupid for Kamala and drag queen story hour. Do it!
Aninny at 5:02
Just curious, what exactly do tampons in the boys bathroom have to do with Trump?
Better get that TDS looked at. It will ruin your life.
Gigi lied about being a nurse and about being a lawyer. Is “she” lying about being a girl as well? Probably.
NUTCHACHACHA wonders what life will be like when she/it/they will have only Freedom and Self-Reliance, entirely bereft of welfare, affirmative action, quotas, WIC, SNAP, TANF, “free stuff,” “free status,” and the balance of her basket of double benefits and entitlements as a minority female – or whatever that is.
Instead, don’t show up for class, barely graduate from high school, get a screw driver turning job, blame Mexicans for suppressing pay, blame elites for getting rich, and vote for Trump cuz you want high wages to buy a house for a doing a job a monkey can do.
Stop complaining about your life.
The fact that Gigi’s and Dennis’ comments are immediately upvoted within minutes of posting tells us that the “upvoter” did not read them, but want to pretend that their comments are worth reading. They are. Because they show us how easily sheep will follow the Shepherds (MSNBC, CNN, NBC, Scripps, Snope, etc.) without understanding where they are being led.
Example : if Gigi had taken the time (she says she is a lawyer???) to look up the actual statute behind Tim Walz’s signing into law, she would have known that what other commenters said is TRUE: the bill contained language to put feminine hygiene products in ALL children’s restrooms. Republicans tried to amend it to state “female restrooms,” but were defeated.
Here, lawyer Gigi, we can help you out. You have to look in the big boys’ and girls’ books to find the actual Bill, HF2497.
That spastic idiot knew damn well it was in boys bathrroms too. She just said she “wondered how long” the tampon tim comments would take.
She left that out of her rant because thats the disingenuous, pathological liar that she is.
She just enjoys acting like a spastic idiot. Apparently thats some sort of badge of honor where she is from??