×

Roberts rules of disorder part II

The U.S. was created as a representative democracy — a constitutional republic — and the Constitution explicitly grants authority to the legislative branch to make laws and to the executive branch to execute those laws. The judicial branch has no constitutional authority to exercise the powers of the other two branches of the federal government.

For over a century the Supreme Court has unconstitutionally legislated from the bench substituting its judgment for the will of the voters and their elected representatives (see https://www.amazon.com/Supreme-Court-vs-Constitution-substituted/dp/0988650916 and https://www.law.uchicago.edu/recordings/gerald-walpin-supreme-court-vs-constitution). It is intolerable in a constitutional republic that a body of just five unelected lifetime-appointed imperfect human judges can have the final word on matters of law and impose their will on the entire country; this is tyranny and the longer it goes on the worse it will get.

Earlier this year I wrote a letter to the editor (see https://www.leaderherald.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/2020/02/roberts-rules-of-disorder-justice-has-decision-to-make/) about how Chief Justice John Roberts had, over time, become the swing vote on several controversial Supreme Court split decisions. I warned that if Roberts sided with the liberal justices and prevented President Donald Trump from rescinding DACA (https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/09/05/memorandum-rescission-daca) the Constitution and Trump’s presidency would suffer more damage, and that’s exactly what has happened.

DACA (see https://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/deferred-action.aspx), was an executive order signed by former President Barack Obama that was illegal and he admitted as much (see https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/daca-unconstitutional-obama-admitted). Obama arguably committed an impeachable offense — and not his first one — with his DACA edict, but I digress.

By preventing Trump from rescinding DACA, the court is forcing him to violate immigration law (see https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/06/the-supreme-court-requires-trump-to-violate-immigration-law/), and in a perverse twist, by letting himself be forced by the Supreme [Court] to enforce an illegal executive edict Trump actually risks impeachment. So I suggest that the president push back against the court’s usurpation of his executive authority and defy its DACA ruling. If the House impeaches him again, then the Senate will probably acquit him again.

If the Republicans retake the House in November, then their first order of business should be the impeachment of Chief Justice John Roberts.

CHARLES F. HEIMERDINGER

Edinburg

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
   

COMMENTS

Starting at $4.75/week.

Subscribe Today