Many of the 'gutted' critics are minorities elected even without racial gerrymandering
The Supreme Court’s decision striking down a majority-black Louisiana congressional district as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander is sending Democrats into paroxysms of hyperbole, with politicians competing to use the most extreme language to denounce the decision and the court that issued it, and to offer the most catastrophically dire description about its consequences.
President Trump warned that the rhetoric was "dangerous," perhaps having in mind the attempt on his life Saturday night and a 2022 assassination attempt against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. The fact that the Supreme Court has ruled against Trump on tariffs and on deploying the National Guard to Chicago has not prevented senior Democrats from describing it as "illegitimate" and calling for retaliatory steps against the justices.
Leading the charge, ironically enough, were two politicians from minority backgrounds who managed to win election nationwide and statewide with predominantly white electorates.
Barack Obama, who was elected senator from Illinois once and president of the United States twice without needing a racially tilted district, said the decision "effectively guts a key pillar of the Voting Rights Act." Obama said the decision "serves as just one more example of how a majority of the current Court seems intent on abandoning its vital role in ensuring equal participation in our democracy and protecting the rights of minority groups against majority overreach."
Kamala Harris, who was elected statewide in California twice—once as attorney general, once as senator—and also was vice president of the United States, all without requiring a racially tailored district, said the decision "guts the Voting Rights Act and turns back the clock on the foundational promise of equality and fairness in our election systems." She said "the court’s decision is motivated by politics," calling it "part of an agenda that conservatives set in place decades ago to steal power from everyday people and then cling to that power for generations."
Other critics were more explicit in calling for punishing or removing the judges who made the decision. "Term limits for the Supreme Court," said Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat of Michigan. "Impeach these corrupt justices. Expand the Court."
Rep. Yvette Clarke of New York, chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, said "the Supreme Court has opened the door to a coordinated attack on black voters across this country. … It’s about silencing black voices."
"The legitimacy of this court is in crisis," Clarke said. "We will fight for Supreme Court reform. We will pursue term limits for justices."
Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, referred to what he called an "illegitimate Supreme Court majority." He called the decision by the "Trump Court" part of "a scheme to suppress the vote and rig the midterm elections." Jeffries did not explain why the "Trump Court" ruled against Trump on other issues, such as tariffs.
President Trump singled out Jeffries’s statement describing the court as illegitimate as particularly troubling. "That’s a dangerous statement," Trump said April 30. "If I made that statement, it would be the biggest story out there." Jeffries, who might be Speaker of the House if Democrats take control, is less of a fringe figure than Tlaib, but his rhetoric was nearly as extreme and he shows no inclination to rein in his colleagues. --->READ MORE HERE
 |
| Peggy Ryan/Peglet00/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 4.0 |
After being told states can’t partake in racist gerrymandering, Democrats are renewing their threats to pack the Supreme Court once they regain power.
In the name of “norms” and “democracy,” radical Democrats are renewing calls to pack the U.S. Supreme Court should they regain control of the federal government.
The wave of alarming threats came about after the high court handed down a ruling in Louisiana v. Callais on Wednesday that nuked states’ ability to use race in the redistricting process. As The Federalist reported, the decision effectively gives states leeway “to eliminate majority-minority districts that were carved out under past interpretations of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act — interpretations that benefited Democrats.”
Clearly fearful it could jeopardize their political power, Democrats wasted no time in using the 6-3 decision — which fell along ideological lines — as an excuse to revive their threats to pack the Supreme Court with left-wing ideologues once given the reigns of Congress and the White House. Such threats were widespread during Joe Biden’s presidency but conveniently became less common once Donald Trump returned to office.
While attacking the conservative justices’ recognition that America has a colorblind Constitution, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries telegraphed his willingness to embrace his party’s court-packing plan if handed the speaker’s gavel. In a recent interview, he emphatically stated that “everything is on the table” when it comes to “deal[ing] with” a court that’s ensuring adherence to the country’s founding legal document.
“The Supreme Court is a disgrace. And then, in the new Congress, we’re gonna have to do something about the Supreme Court,” Jeffries said. “And let me be very clear: Everything is on the table — everything — to deal with this corrupt MAGA majority that is issuing political opinions that are designed to bolster the prospects of the Republican Party. And we will not allow them to succeed.”
The far-left Demand Justice issued a similar veiled threat in apparent support of such efforts. President Josh Orton — who boasts a background in Democrat Party activism — issued a statement following Callais‘ release, in which he smeared the Supreme Court for its decision and said it “must face fundamental reform if it is to once again serve our democracy.”
Demand Justice is notorious for its slanderous campaigns against Republican judicial nominees and past support for court-packing. The group also notably partook in the left’s destructive efforts to keep Brett Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court, and recently disclosed plans to block future Trump nominees to the high court should vacancies arise. --->READ MORE HERE
If you like what you see, please "Like" and/or Follow us on FACEBOOK here, GETTR here, and TWITTER here.
No comments:
Post a Comment