House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries has struggled to pander to the mob to secure power in the midterm elections, including brandishing a baseball bat on social media to show his radical bona fides. With Democratic Socialists chanting “you’re next” when seeing Jeffries, he continues to struggle to stay in front of the mob. This week, he doubled down on his pledge to throw the Supreme Court to the mob if they make him the next Speaker of the House of Representatives.
After the recent gains by far-left candidates in states like Minnesota and the near victory of Democratic Socialist Francesca Hong in Wisconsin, Jeffries came out to reaffirm his intent to radically change the highest court. According to the Washington Times, Jeffries declared, “There’s a variety of different options that are on the table, and I think that we can’t foreclose any single one of them.” He added that the “conservative, right-wing majority on the Supreme Court has become basically a subsidiary of the MAGA Republican Party.”
He promised to make far-left Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.) the driving force behind changing the Court, including possible 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices and expanding the Court to create an instant liberal majority.
Notably, none of these figures were claiming that the Court was fundamentally flawed until it ruled against them, particularly in cases that impacted their political power such as declaring racial gerrymandering to be unconstitutional.
What is interesting is that the liberal justices reject this narrative, reminding citizens that the Court has delivered major losses to the Trump Administration. Indeed, President Trump has routinely attacked conservative justices for ruling against him and his Administration.
In addition, polls show that the majority of the public supports virtually all of the recent major rulings, including the ban on racial gerrymandering. It is only the Democrats who oppose those rulings and are now demanding a hostile takeover of the Court.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) has called for packing the Court because it does not follow her views and those of “widely held public opinion.” I have pushed back on that rationale, given the Court’s function as a countermajoritarian institution. However, these polls even challenge the flawed rationale for court packing.
So Jeffries is promising that the work of James Madison will be undone by the likes of Jamie Raskin and Elizabeth Warren. To have these calls on our 250th anniversary is crushingly ironic. Other leading Democrats have lined up to pledge to fundamentally change the Court, which has played a key role in making this the oldest and most stable republic in history.
It is simply about power. Former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder has put packing the Supreme Court front and center, explaining, “[We’re] talking about the acquisition and the use of power if there is a Democratic trifecta in 2028.”
I have called it the Nike School of Constitutional Law. Democratic leaders are pledging to “just do it” to appease the mob. Of course, some of these measures would be challenged if done without constitutional amendment. The Supreme Court would then have to rule on the effort to pack or limit its members. The expansion can be done by legislative vote. Although most Americans oppose court packing, Democrats view control of the Court as essential to pushing through a radical agenda to change the political system to their advantage.
Years ago, Harvard professor Michael Klarman laid out a radical agenda to change the system to guarantee Republicans “will never win another election.” However, he warned that “the Supreme Court could strike down everything I just described.” Therefore, the court must be packed in advance to allow these changes to occur.
In Federalist 10, Madison discussed the destructive im
pact of factions in forcing through opportunistic changes to advance their interests:
“By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.”
We are witnessing the same factional politics being pushed by leaders who believe that they can ride a rage wave into power. They have a greater likelihood of causing lasting damage to our system than guaranteeing their own lasting power. History is not on their side. Today’s revolutionaries are often tomorrow’s reactionaries in an age of rage.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
When even one of these dsa children appears on the floor of Congress, we will long for the simple days of this moron with his baseball bat. It is going to happen, at least once. We had better be prepared. And anyone still supporting the dnc – what in the name of Zeus is the matter with you?
It’s always the left who does this.
___________________________
Washington — The top federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C., said a woman has been arrested and faces two felony charges related to vandalism of the World War II Memorial in the capital.
Melissa Farris has been charged with depredation against property of the United States and destruction of veterans’ memorials, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro said on X. Pirro said Farris is in custody.
“Vandalizing our World War II Memorial is a despicable attack on a sacred monument honoring the Americans who fought and died for our freedom,” Pirro said.
Turley Writes:
The “conservative, right-wing majority on the Supreme Court has become basically a subsidiary of the MAGA Republican Party.”
…………………………………….
Yes, at least half the public believes this.
Every Federalist-Conservative on the court was selected by Leonard Leo, the Chief Federalist. The Federalists are essentially a political machine sponsored by Koch money. Their mission is promoting Libertarian values whether the public wants them or not.
Though strangely Libertarianism gets tangled with traditional Catholic values because Leonard Leo is also a Catholic activist. ..Go figure..!
Black THUG TRASH.
The question I have is do these people really believe in what they are proposing?
Or is there entire platform the hate and rage rhetoric, “We are not Trump!” or “We hate Trump!” or “We are going to do everything opposite of Trump!”
That seems to be the extent of their strategy going into the mid-terms. Gotta keep up the rage to 11 for the next 80 some odd days!
How exhausting.
Yes, Estovir, everyone hates Trump. No president has worked harder to be hated than Donald Trump.
Mental illness is the defining feature of the left. Trump is hated by all the right people – the people who hate America and are mentally ill. It’s good to be hated by the side aligning itself with evil. It means he’s doing the right thing for the people of America.
Estovir, right now Trump is hated for starting a war he can’t finish. Iran is becoming a vastly bigger embarrassment than Afghanistan.
vastly bigger embarrassment than Afghanistan
That’s exactly what I mean about mental illness. Only the mentally ill would actually believe such silliness. The number of troop deaths in this entire war is about the same as Biden’s Afghanistan withdrawal fiasco. And while Afghanistan went back to the way it was, Iran’s nuclear weapons program has been set back decades, and the Islamo-fascist regime is severely weakened. That you would actually believe what you type makes you look like a complete stooge.
So what? Boo hoo that the MAGA SCOTUS may come to a premature end. What Jeffieries wants to do is legal and less bad than Mitch denying Obama is court pick.
@Sally
That you use the term, ‘MAGA’, discredits anything else you say, instantly. Just a pro-tip for progressives that are now trying to hide their intentions.
Jeffries, Warren, Bernie, Schumer, AOC et al need to read your book, “Rage and the Republic.” Maybe they can learn (probably for the first time) that the mob always eats its own.
Where is the dividing line between mob sentiment and “the consent of the governed”? I defy anyone to present a clear line of demarcation. Obviously, mob zealotry is disastrous and must be kept at bay. But, those in power benefitting from the status quo can easily paint over reasonable grievances as mob rumblings, and that is equally dangerous.
This is the pitfall of “us vs. them” factional identity politics. The immediate association of a reform idea with “them” closes the mind to meritocratic consideration of the reform.
Not every Supreme Court reform suggested by Hakeem J. is unhinged mobocracy. Keep the black robes to 9. The idea that every Presidential term gets 1 appointment, and that Justices serve for a fixed term has the a stabilizing effect. The death or retirement of a Justice would need to be addressed with an interim appointment to complete the term vacated. In practice, if we had a 20-year term, Presidents would appoint 50-60 year-olds in good health, and unfinished terms would be rare.
What I object to is rejecting any idea voiced by Jeffries because he’s Jeffries. Each idea deserves its own rational, dispassionate contemplation. It’s only with that meritocratic mindset that America can keep moving forward straddling a cauldron of bubbling conflict.
Detecting when reasonable dissent turns into a violent mob – like indecency, perhaps it’s easier to detect than to put into words. We know it when we see it.
And we are seeing it. Calls to eat the rich, defund the police, promote socialism and communism, abolish prisons, abolish the Senate, abolish ICE, open the border, put men in women’s sports, pack the Supreme Court, “get up in their faces,” chase them out of restaurants, smash them with a baseball bat, and generally whip up an assassination-chic culture in which attempted assassinations and actual assassinations take place. That’s what’s happening on the left. At this point, it’s definitely a mob.
including possible 18-year term limits for Supreme Court justices
That would be struck down in a heartbeat as in violation of Article III, Section 1 – “The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour . . .” The holing of ofrice during good behavior precludes fixed terms.
The bigger threat is court packing. Which is why the Keep-9 amendment is needed now more than ever.
You didn’t say whether the 18-year fixed term would be good if brought in with a Constitutional Amendment?
What are the merits of a fixed term? Detriments? I mean, thinking beyond the present makeup of the Court?
If brought in with a constitutional amendment, then it’s the will of the people and so be it. Whether I personally would favor that? I haven’t really thought it through – you’re the first person I’ve seen propose it as a constitutional amendment – but I can see some merit to the idea. It would rejuvenate the Court, and people would know ahead of time when a POTUS would get a Scotus pick when deciding who to vote for. But I would also want the amendment to have a “Keep 9” section.
I’d like to see a rational debate about 1 – appropriate number of justices, 2 – term limits for justices and 3 – number of justices that a president can nominate in one term. When that’s done set it in concrete with a constitutional amendment so that future political games are eliminated.
Hakeem Jeffries = milquetoast
A bag of wind with no action. He is trying to incite others to do his dirty work.
Apparently, the concept that one of the purposes of the Supreme Court was to AVOID having “the will of the people” destroy the system developed 250 years ago isn’t a good thing anymore. Lynching’s are just one example of “the will of the people” gone wrong. Some people don’t learn from the mistakes of others-at least where their path to power is concerned.
‘I have called it the Nike School of Constitutional Law. Democratic leaders are pledging to “just do it” to appease the mob.’
Yup. No thought to the lasting damage, consequences, or reality afterward. I can only conclude that these are not smart people; if I were to be truly severe – these people are simply not well. Jeffries is a total clown and a tool, but he perfectly embodies his party’s modern iteration, dsa or no dsa. The ‘educated’ class. Stop voting dem for everything, even the local PTA. You might as well vote for your dog, and they would likely be more sensible and kind.
Even the Washington Post had an editorial against Schiff and Court packing today. That’s how radical and dangerous it is.
Btw, I do not subscribe to the WAPO, I read it on RealClearPolitics today. I would never financially support any left wing media outlet.
I guess in theory, if we elected better people in all forms of govt that followed the Constitution, we wouldn’t need a Supreme Court.