Dems Pave a Gavel Road to Court-Packing
Apparently, Pelosi isn’t interested in whatever conclusions the president’s phony commission on the courts comes to.
Now we’ve heard it all. Democrats, who were already the butt of jokes for calling childcare “infrastructure,” have done us one better. According to House liberals, court-packing is too! In a tweet, Congressman Mondaire Jones, a New York liberal, declared: “Supreme Court expansion is infrastructure.” Like a lot of people, Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) couldn’t believe their eyes. “You just can’t make this stuff up,” she shook her head. And unfortunately, Democrats aren’t. They’re on the march to expand the court — no matter what they call it.
Apparently, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) isn’t interested in whatever conclusions the president’s phony commission on the courts comes to. Her party is ready to pack the court — and pack it now. In a bombshell new bill, radical Democrats in both chambers are demanding that we increase the number of Supreme Court justices to 13, a move that’s designed to blunt the impact of Donald Trump’s appointments. Led by Jones, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) in the House and Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.), the effort is an obvious payback to far-Left groups who think activist judges are the only ones who can do all their radical bidding.
“Republicans stole the Court’s majority,” Markey argued, “with Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation completing their crime spree. Of all the damage Donald Trump did to our Constitution, this stands as one of his greatest travesties.” If Democrats wanted to light a fire under the GOP, they succeeded. Republicans exploded in pushback, calling the idea “delusional.” This “goes against everything we believe as Americans,” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy fired back. And it also, he pointed out, goes against what Joe Biden said he believed as a senator. “This just goes to show how far the Democrat Party has moved.” We’re talking about “overtaking a branch of government simply to have your control over a nation. It must be the scariest thing I’ve ever heard them do.” Are there no common-sense or moderate Democrats left, he wondered?
The ones who are must be seething. This power play puts them in a horrible position heading into 2022. In case the Left hadn’t noticed, the courts are a driving issue for voters, and swing districts won’t take kindly to Democrats trying to blow up another established institution. Frankly, GOP strategists say, this is a “gift.” “And making it a bill… means we get to [put] moderate House Democrats on the record,” a former staffer of the National Republican Senatorial Committee pointed out. For conservatives, who’ve already had record-breaking quarters for fundraising, this will only add to their momentum.
Thanks to Left’s overreach in Georgia, the border crisis, the trillions of dollars in spending, and corporate woke-ism, the Republican base is already motivated. This is like adding dynamite to an inferno. Back in 2016, the Supreme Court was one of the biggest reasons people said they voted for Donald Trump. Five years later, they still have major concerns about the Left’s ideas for turning the bench into a super legislature. Last October, almost 60 percent of the country opposed the Democrats’ push for court-packing. In fact, it was such an unpopular idea that Joe Biden wouldn’t even tell the American people where he stood. “You’ll know my position when the election’s over” was his non-answer.
Now we know. Biden and his party plan to “spit in the face of judicial independence,” Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) warned — an agenda so far Left that even the late Ruth Bader Ginsberg didn’t support it. Nor does fellow liberal Justice Stephen Breyer. The court’s authority, he argued, “like the rule of law, depends on trust — a trust that the court is guided by legal principle, not politics.” There’s already growing suspicion about government institutions, he pointed out. And in the court, the perception that justices are “liberal” or “conservative” would only get worse.
Is the threat real? Yes, it is a threat. It’s like playing with a loaded gun, it could go off. But I think Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and the Democrats are holding this and the legislative filibuster over the heads of Republican senators to force them to approve radical measures like HR 1 and the Equality Act or else they will pull the trigger.
“If you don’t (fill in the blank on whatever issue), we will blow up the filibuster and pack the court.” Yes, Senators Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) have made some reassuring statements lately about the Senate’s rules, but the reality is, they’re under a tremendous amount of pressure from ruthless party bosses to go along with this radical makeover of our institutions.
In the meantime, conservative groups like Judicial Crisis Network plan to bring the heat with a million-dollar ad buy calling out the Democrats’ absurd plan. Back in Congress, Republicans are moving forward with a constitutional amendment that would freeze the Supreme Court’s number at nine. “Imagine if we reduced the number to five and just kept the Republicans,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) asked his friends on the other side of the aisle. “You guys would go crazy.” But crazy is what this whole idea is — and deep down, what’s left of the rational wing of the party knows it.
Originally published here.
Sitting on the Dox of California’s Bay
If there’s anything we’ve learned about the radical Left, it’s that their calling card is intimidation. It’s been liberals’ most effective weapon for holding conservatives hostage in political debates for years. And this week, California Democrats are taking the idea to the extreme — threatening to publicize the names, addresses, and employers of anyone who signs a recall petition. Why? Because they’re terrified that Americans are on the verge of taking their blue states back!
“It’s chilling,” PJ Media’s Victoria Taft warned. Members of a state senate election committee are actually advancing a bill that would dox voters who sign petitions to kick bad politicians out of office. Pastor Jack Hibbs of Calvary Chapel Chino Hills was on “Washington Watch” Wednesday to talk about the dangerous line their proposal crosses. “Let’s remember that in California, we have a history of evicting or recalling our elected officials,” he explained. “And that’s a good thing. What’s interesting is that every recall effort that has been successful in California has been the California voter against a Democrat that is seated in office. Why? [They’re] too extreme? And the man who engineered this bill that is none other than Josh Newman, who was recalled by the California voter[s] and literally thrown out of office.”
Now, ironically, he’s the author of legislation that would “bully, intimidate, and silence” anyone who takes action like that in the future. And the worst part is, Jack explains, this would reveal Californians’ private names and their employment. Obviously, he says, “California politicians are panicking right now. And for that, we’re grateful.” But it’s the height of arrogance for any public official to try to stifle the voters’ mechanisms for holding them accountable.
And imagine, Jack said, that you work for the governor. “You don’t like him or the policies that you’ve inherited with him. You’re on his staff, but you sign one of these petitions and think you’re safe.” Under this bill, you’d be exposed for everyone to see — your name, email, contact information, and who you work for. “So all of a sudden, that silences anyone who could be flushed out by a mayor’s office, a city councilman’s [office], or the county board of supervisors. And now you become a target.”
At its core, this is the Democrats’ M.O. We’ve seen it all across the map, but in the rise of the cancel culture especially. “Find those who speak up against you and destroy them, because there’s no room for us to be a republic. There’s no room for us to have any voice of dissent because that would make it America,” Jack shook his head. “We can’t have that anymore.”
This is dangerous. It undermines — not just democracy — but our freedom and voice in the political process. Californians needs to speak up and push back, while they can. After all, there are legitimate reasons for recalling people who’ve betrayed the public trust.
Look at what happened in the California Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, where Democrats agreed religious freedom isn’t controversial and then voted down a bill that would have upheld it. All Republicans were trying to do was save the U.S. Supreme Court — who’s had to intervene on this issue five times in the state during COVID — some work. Instead of treating churches and other houses of worship differently than liquor stores or shopping malls, members introduced a piece of legislation called the “Religion Is Essential Act.” Their whole point was, “No political leader has the right to shut down religion.” Not in a pandemic or crisis or any kind of emergency.
“This is not a partisan issue, or a theological issue,” said state Sen. Andreas Borgeas (R). “It is a constitutional issue — a First Amendment constitutional issue that evokes equal protection.” According to the California Globe, Borgeas explained that he likes to go to church with his 93-year old dad. But as the coronavirus spread, he stopped taking his dad to church out of concern for his vulnerability. As soon as more health protocols were in place, he felt comfortable and realized it was realistic and safe to go back. But the state made that almost impossible with suffocating regulations and capacity limits deep into 2020.
The Supreme Court hit back on those gathering restrictions as recently as last Friday, sounding like a broken record in its insistence that churches be treated like every other secular institution. This bill would have made that a point of law. And while Democrats said they “agree with [their] colleague that this is about the Constitution,” they went on to tank the proposal on party lines. “Until our state law clearly declares religion is essential,” one of the only two Republicans on the committee said, “our current governor and future governors will continue to be able to side-step and undermine our religious freedom.”
Originally published here.
Kemp: ‘Corporate America Got Played. We’re Winning This Battle.’
The Democrats had a nearly flawless plan to ram through their federal takeover of elections, H.R. 1. They just had to wait for some southern Republicans to hinder poor minorities’ ability to vote, play the racially-charged “victim” card, and then insist that a federal solution was needed to override racist election laws passed by Republican-controlled state legislatures. Not only was the plan sophisticated and anti-racist, they thought, but surely none of these backwater racist Republicans would see through the trap. Or so believed the out-of-touch, coastal elites who created it.
But the Democrats’ anti-racist counter-offensive had an Achilles’ Heel. Sure, they laid all the groundwork. They singled out Georgia, with its large urban minority population, where Democrats have been crafting the narrative of race-based voter suppression for years. They reserved the domain name “Jim Crow 2.0” three weeks before Georgia Republicans unveiled their election law. They rhetorically connected the U.S. Senate filibuster to H.R. 1, the Corrupt Politicians Act, as if it were the only obstacle standing in the way of its passage. And when Georgia Republicans finally signed the bill into law, Democrats high and low, along with their media allies, immediately pounced with their well-crafted stockpile of invectives and slogans. The only problem was: the law isn’t racist.
Georgia Governor Brian Kemp (R) explained on Wednesday night’s Pray Vote Stand, “I think we actually caught these folks off guard, to be quite honest with you. They thought we were going to do something else.” The Democrats’ earliest claims were easily proven false. As even the Washington Post, MSNBC, and PolitiFact have pointed out, the bill increased early voting hours, provided ballot drop boxes, allowed poll workers to distribute water, and replaced arbitrary signature matching with (free) voter ID requirements.
But when Democrats realized they were throwing spaghetti at a ceiling fan, they switched tactics and ordered their corporate cronies into action. As Kemp described it, “These folks are pros at what they’re doing. They are shaking these companies down.” Apparently, the Left thinks policy decisions should be decided by whomever can throw the most harmful tantrum.
And they really did a number on the corporations, judging from their absurd responses. Major League Baseball (based in New York, which has more restrictive voting laws than Georgia) decided to punish the state by relocating its all-star game to Colorado (which also has more restrictive voting laws). FRC’s Ken Blackwell remarked, “If you want to get into the corporate offices of Delta and Coca-Cola, what do you have to do? You have to show a photo I.D.” The list goes on.
The furor may die down soon — whenever the media moves on to a new Republican-bashing narrative. “Many folks in the corporate community are now realizing that they have been played,” said Kemp. They were told the bill was racist, and so reacted reflexively, but now that the facts are finding daylight, the Georgia boycott bandwagon just looks silly. Kemp promised, “we’re winning this battle.”
We have the “best constitutional republic ever created and designed,” said Blackwell. “Not perfect, but perfectible, and the best… because we are prosperous, we are fair, and we are free.” He said, “the most vocal element of the Democratic Party … are trying to decouple local communities and states from their constitutionally designed right to administer elections.” They would willingly surrender the democratic norms that made us prosperous. They are “stuck on stupid,” according to Blackwell. And in Georgia, they’re losing.
Watch the entire Pray Vote Stand for the latest on the Democrats’ losing fight against election reform below and pray with us for the truth to continue to prevail.
Originally published here.
This is a publication of the Family Research Council. Mr. Perkins is president of FRC.
Start a conversation using these share links: