Monday PM ~ The Front Page Cover

 The Front Page Cover 
"I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened"
.
Featuring:
Against Judicial Activism
Defending the Constitution from those who would rewrite it
Adam Freedman
.
"Know who you are standing with"
"Show me your friends and I'll show you your future"
~~~lll~~~
.
 Donald Trump Brings Levity to Presidential Race 
Donald Trump would be a mere sideshow curiosity in the 2016 elections if it were not for his name recognition and entertainment factor. According to Real Clear Politics, Trump is polling higher than Rick Perry, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, Lindsey Graham and Bobby Jindal. But even if he's fired in the end — and we hope he is — he will provide some much-needed humor. After Tuesday's announcement, Politico pulled Trump's 10 best lines. Notably, however, Politico missed the best one: "When did we beat Japan at anything?" Well, there was that whole WWII thing in the Pacific... But to put things in perspective, as absurd as the Trump vanity campaign is, he is far more qualified than Barack nObama was in 2009 — or today! For example, nObama put loose lips Joe Biden on his ticket. When Trump was asked who he wanted as a running mate, he replied, “I think Oprah would be great. I’d love to have Oprah." Frankly, presidential elections could use a little levity. It's been a long time since the last billionaire vanity campaign kept us amused, compliments of Ross Perot!  -The Patriot Post  
.
4064068816?profile=original
.
 White Male Targets Blacks in Charleston 
A young white male in his early 20s murdered nine blacks who were attending a Wednesday night prayer service in Charleston's Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. It's still a developing story, as the murderer has not yet been apprehended and the names of the victims have not yet been disclosed, but according to Charleston Police Chief Greg Mullen, "We believe this is a hate crime; that is how we are investigating it." But already some anti-Second Amendment crusaders are exploiting the tragedy to advance their pet policy proposals. Charleston Mayor Joseph Riley was the first to do so, wasting no time advocating for greater gun control as a diversionary ploy. “I personally believe there are far too many guns out there, and access to guns, it’s far too easy," he said. "Our society has not been able to deal with that yet." Make no mistake: This story is newsworthy. But it's also worth noting that, on average, there are between 30 and 40 homicides every day in America, most of which are black-on-black. If "black lives matter" to the Leftmedia, why aren't these other victims covered in the news?  -The Patriot Post  
.
4064068816?profile=original
.
 HILLY TAPPED FUTURE CAMPAIGN NETWORK FOR BENGHAZI    SPIN  
Politico: “While still secretary of state, [Hilly Clinton] emailed back and forth with [Sidney Blumenthal] about efforts by one of the groups, Media Matters, to neutralize criticism of her handling of the deadly assault on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, sources tell POLITICO. ‘Got all this done. Complete refutation on Libya smear,’ Blumenthal wrote to Clinton in an Oct. 10, 2012, email into which he had pasted links to four Media Matters posts criticizing Fox News and Republicans for politicizing the Benghazi attacks and challenging claims of lax security around the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, according to a source who has reviewed the email exchange. Blumenthal signed off the email to Clinton by suggesting that one of her top aides, Philippe Reines, ‘can circulate these links,’ according to the source.”  
-Fox News 
.
header_2014.jpg
.
 The Judge’s Ruling: Hidden failure -  Against the backdrop of quiet arms deals that put weapons in the wrong hands and secretive alliances that lead to failed states and terrorist breeding grounds, Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitanoasks, “What do we do about lawless government by secrecy? What do we do about government officials who act as if they are above the law? What do we do if one of them lives in the White House and controls all federal prosecutions? What do we do if another of them is presently on her way there?”
          [Visit the Judge’s Chambers to get Socratic on the Libya and Syria wars. Watch here.]
 -Fox News 
.
header_2014.jpg
.
 HAMILTON TAKEN IN LEW OF A DEMOCRAT 
Founding Father Alexander Hamilton, the first Treasury secretary, will be demoted from his place on the $10 bill. Why Hamilton? A previous petition argued that President Andrew Jackson, founder of the modern Democratic Party and slave owner, should be removed from the $20 bill, but Wednesday Treasury SecretaryJack Lew decreed that Hamilton would take the fall. Hamilton spent his whole life preserving the currency while Jackson did everything he could to break the big banks. While the reasoning behind the decision seems unclear it’s safe to say it’snot going over so well.  
-Fox News 
.
header_2014.jpg
.

AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=

ZXUen98GLV9uXaVfP6qoX06n2KEYf7uhA-6x3ukdQ7MLMhTWI7GlT4PEGhdxxSKGNTj9MypIv-e3MIBk8vY9JkIY8w=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
Senator Jeff Sessions
 nOBAMA NAILED FOR ILLEGALS MURDERING AMERICANS  
(Leo Hohmann) ~ President nObama is catching heat from two U.S. senators for releasing violent criminals onto the streets who then went on to murder 121 Americans between 2010 and 2014... And there are new concerns about the possibility of violent crimes being committed by the nearly 30,000 illegal Cuban immigrants who are walking U.S. streets with criminal records.        https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?shva=1#inbox/14e0e7e865e342c2?compose=14e1115b76b9b8bf%2C14e111822603d630
.
%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
 Z Street Court Victory May "Blow The Doors" Off The IRS Scandal  
(Jeff Dunetz) ~ Prehaps the smallest and least funded organization involved in the IRS Scandal Z Street, a Zionist rather than a Teaparty group, which sued the IRS before Lois Lerner admitted the bias, may turn out to be the group that blows the cover off the entire scandal... The pro-Israel organization Z Street was today, once again, vindicated in a court of law in its now nearly five year effort to redress the violation of its Constitutional rights by the Internal Revenue Service. The judges in their Opinion were far more restrained than their reactions to the IRS arguments during the oral argument which took place on May 4, but their conclusion was the same. In a unanimous Opinion issued Friday, June 19, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with and affirmed the D.C. District Court's ruling that the pro-Israel organization Z Street correctly brought a lawsuit alleging the Internal Revenue Service violated Z Street First Amendment rights by engaging in viewpoint discrimination.       http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com/2015/06/todays-z-street-court-victory-may-blow.html?utm_source=The+Lid+List&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=e16fce133e-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_term=0_597b72c01c-e16fce133e-291705165&goal=0_597b72c01c-e16fce133e-291705165 
.
7yHoirymblDdYSKlFQTkj3gzW31BSjyC1p77BAL1ujXYA-Vq5193vKkGDhCINJQ27nGv6kTTD1GWztx_WFEoLdsdu7rZmQo_36XSyZmOxWOQT9nZae-LmiQwFrDBDShTAs5sLNh_ivGB4BgNvFuaNQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
 nObama Blames His Failed Presidency On Congress And Others  
(Brian Anderson) ~ The good news is nObama has finally admitted his presidency has been an unmitigated failure. Remember all that “hope and change” he promised?... Well, the President is ready to concede that he didn’t deliver. He however predictably can’t own up to his shortcomings and blames it all on Congress and the American people because that just how narcissists roll. During his bi-monthly fundraising trip to California, nObama made the stunning admission at Tyler Perry’s house in front of a who’s who of liberal Hollywood elitists. He is still blames other for his shortcomings.       http://downtrend.com/71superb/obama-blames-his-failed-presidency-on-congress-and-the-american-people
.
 Federal Judge Orders nObama IRS to Court  
(judicialwatch.org) ~ Try telling the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that you lost some tax documents and then magically found them again once legal pressure was applied. What do you think the end result would be for you if you tried to operate this way?... Judicial Watch is succeeding in court in its effort to remind the nObama IRS that it isn’t above the law.  But it’s clear to us after reviewing a seven-page court filing the IRS finally submitted in response to a court order that the tax agency is working to stonewall our efforts. So, late last Friday President nObama’s recalcitrant IRS agency finally complied with Judge Sullivan’s June 4 order requiring the agency to provide answers to Judicial Watch. Contrary to previous agency claims that the emails were lost and unrecoverable, the IRS finally admits that it has as many as 6,400 new Lerner emails but won’t promise to turn them over to us just yet. Even though the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) already identified and removed emails that are duplicates, the IRS is in “the process of conducting further manual deduplication of the 6,400” emails, rather than reviewing them in response to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act requests that are more than two years old now.        
.
 A Guy Who’s Fighting ISIS Just Did Something EPIC  
(Elizabeth Dickerson) ~ When Tom Locks of Britain got the chance to fight against ISIS, he took it. Locks, following the footsteps of a growing number of individuals, sold his home and possessions, left his job and the comforts of everyday life, said goodbye to his friends and loved ones, and headed to the front lines of Kurdistan... Now fighting on foreign soil, the former bouncer is putting his construction skills to good use. He is helping rebuild anything he can. When he isn’t building, he is wielding a weapon. He was asked about the leadership in England, as well as the leadership in the U.S. and their stance on ISIS and lack of a strategy. Locks said: “of course Barack nObama has not got a strategy to combat Daesh, neither does David Cameron. That’s why there are people like us out here on the front line, getting mortared and shot on a daily basis. It’s a joke! Not only do they not want to commit people, but they won’t commit a single pound to helping us deal with the world’s biggest problem.” He hopes, in the meantime, that the U.S. and Great Britain wake up to the very real threat of ISIS.        http://www.westernjournalism.com/a-guy-whos-fighting-isis-just-did-something-epic-to-utterly-embarrass-barack-and-michelle/?utm_source=MailChimp&utm_medium=email&utm_content=featured-stories&utm_campaign=DailyEmail06.20.15
.
0chgTxUjeaynUkjoNOQxhxqAbD2-H18KkyQtjZ6xdvALyhibYhtRCWZxuAuvlk2brlkV0tEkYaWdNX696zU6wyW3O5FvfbrPML1uAnDJYHxZlOUWptn-b57Dk-fhCAuh=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
Brigitte Gabriel
 Brigitte Gabriel Speaks at 2015 Watchment on the Wall Conference  
(ACT for America) ~ Brigitte Gabriel recently addressed the gathering of pastors attending the annual Family Research Council "Watchmen on the Wall” event. She gave a fantastic speech about the dangers facing our country from radical Islam, and what we must do as a nation to confront this very real threat...         
.
sZlKtJ3-v0YuEns1fQncKBw4F1kN5FQbakB2PIVU-l3CGRHie6DtoHgf_9WlZIz92HyU-BxXkhOQuUuDlOB0tcl_D0h2pw9pjYSOVxdaaKPfKukcfVQJ2gvl_TQ=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
David Malone of the Green Party in UK
  Same Global Trade Scam In Britain...  
(rickwells.us) ~ David Malone is a member of the Green Party in the UK. His message is not one of party nor is it merely related to his own nation, though that is his point of reference... His country is facing the same kind of organized criminal elite conspiracy disguised as a trade agreement as we are in the United States. The tactics used by the corporate cabal in Britain are remarkably similar to those being used against the American people. This video was about an hour and a half in its original form, taken from a February 2015 presentation. It’s cut down here in the interest of time, for the sake of distributing it to as many interested people as possible. The link to the full presentation appears below the edited version. Listen for the first 1:08, to hear how they’re attempting to force it through without ratification and declare it in effect simply by virtue of the negotiations having been completed. The practice of dictatorial imposition by fascist decree is not limited to McCon-nell and backstabber Boehner. It’s happening in Europe too. http://rickwells.us/same-global-trade-scam-in-britain-what-happened-to-them-is-happening-to-us/
.
tmPGm99jGd0JxVKwAMELgXEqvXItw6KCPljhEfdz7tYzCJ2Ao6WGHQ7jbHdldiVap5rck7dpGAEoMC0gjB7aqyH9JEseann_QPuqt2GIxvkxPhB16GwNWrQ8kA=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
Pope Francis
 Pope Francis Included Islamic Passages In Climate Hoax Encyclical  
(rickwells.us) ~ Pope Francis was not content with merely spreading the politics of Marxist wealth redistribution in his “climate change” fairyhoax encyclical, arguably the whole reason for its creation in the first place... He also chose to reinforce its supposed legitimacy by featuring a passage from an Islamic poet, Ali al-Khawas. As reported in Breitbart News, the “climate” encyclical included a depiction of the Muslim poet as cautioning people not to “put too much distance between the creatures of the world and the interior experience of God.” The symbolism of incorporating this Islamic text into the encyclical is much more significant than the actual words. What he did is as close to including Islamic teachings in a Catholic document as he could without actually quoting the Koran, an act which should have Catholics around the world scratching their heads, asking themselves “who is this guy and what is he up to?” Certainly that is what many non-Catholics are doing. There was no need for him to do what he did, either with the encyclical itself or with the Islamic inclusion and none of it is happening accidentally. 
.
 The First Arabic Language School Coming To Texas  
The nObama Regime Has Mandated That Arabic Language And Culture Be Taught In Texas Public Schools...
WhTZ0bxYgvuWgo5F3OJtqs9ru1dBIehAHV1PzVoWyqf9KmpI0IHkcuq5He9c9LR0YqS18P0sjcbEudw-nDH_WYds2pg-fPzxa6kud8sWmqTrlj4=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
Will your state be next? How long until Christian, Jewish, & other non-Muslim students will be forced to drop down and raise their asses to Allah in prayer?
.
HxiZkRvyKHXu_3_q0wWfu-ggyzxRalykrVk6_0R8qc-HurWEtIw4A3FGzDKR_ywUUMWRcKOVjsFbEJLfpoTttHMSa6n1FPO-7kkjwSn_Y2TxiCABtMzn34RQTiNPPw=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
Bill Maher and Ann Coulter
 Ann Coulter Cages Doomed Chihuahua Luis Gutierrez With Facts  
(rickwells.us) ~ Ann Coulter kicks the Chihuahua nipping at her ankles, the one barking loudly and lunging from a safe distance, whose primary purpose as a Congressman is to reward foreigners for invading our country based upon racist criterion... While that agenda is characteristic of many Democrats, there’s only one Chihuahua, Illinois’ Luis Gutierrez. If someone is a foreign Latino, Gutierrez is their dog in Congress. Coulter and Gutierrez were both the guests of Bill Maher, with Coulter bringing facts and reason to the conversation while Gutierrez came armed with the usual political rhetoric, talking points and racial threats.  
.

AGHnzvDgAIc_dkrUO59jF21LrUmiQ79dA3RIshU-YlAdfSFPOhc54BmJs1OTRtvnrEX-cCbeiMVXdurlydL03p7YzXsWg_6cAavWTIOYU1PogQU4ftAjtXM=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=

 

Against Judicial Activism
Defending the Constitution from those who would rewrite it
Adam Freedman
.
Hqv-iLcB-Mtn0YmPnPSixcn_lRhqzHbYUOxyLNumQudL1DomHIvshT6AogQi5rLhgkyxJB_3-0ZOCdH-Q1Bva1t0kvk5DSk4nrUg2bjiqA=s0-d-e1-ft#%3Ca%20rel%3Dnofollow%20href=
.
     (city-journal.org) ~ The meaning of the United States Constitution is “fixed by the original meaning of its words,” according to the authors of a highly engaging new book titled, simply, The Constitution: An Introduction. That proposition—music to the ears of originalists like Justice Antonin Scalia—underlies the book’s central theme: defending the Constitution’s text against those politicians and judges who “seek to rewrite its terms in the service of what are thought to be desirable policies.”
.
     The Constitution is the product of a multi-year collaboration between Michael Stokes Paulsen, a professor of law at the University of St. Thomas, and his non-lawyer son, Luke. The book’s first half provides an overview of the Constitution’s key provisions and an introduction to the major schools of constitutional interpretation, including the authors’ own originalist perspective. The second half offers a condensed history of American constitutional law. With sidebars on many of the personalities who shaped constitutional doctrine—not just judges, but politicians and litigants, too—the book does an excellent job of placing legal controversies in historical context.
.
     The Paulsens are at their best when critiquing the modern era of judicial activism. In their telling, the Warren Court (1953–69) produced “careless” decisions, because the justices were focused on achieving policy goals rather than upholding the law. The nadir of this results-oriented jurisprudence was, as the authors correctly point out, the Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which invented a federal right to abortion on demand. The authors assail Roe as “the most extreme example of judicial activism in the twentieth century.” They even compare the decision—unfavorably—to Dred Scott, the notorious pro-slavery decision that helped provoke the Civil War. “Not even Dred Scott,” they argue, “so completely seemed to disregard the text as Roe did.”
.
     Rather than citing the Constitution’s actual language, the Roe Court relied on the doctrine of “substantive due process,” the idea that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment empowers judges to strike down laws that they consider flawed, even if not strictly unconstitutional. That doctrine had been strongly endorsed by the Court eight years earlier in Griswold v. Connecticut, in which Justice William O. Douglas famously discovered a constitutional right to privacy hidden in “penumbras, formed by emanations” of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments.
.
     Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, and Souter come in for heavy criticism from the authors for their less-than-courageous decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) to reaffirm Roe “whether or not mistaken” for fear of provoking a political backlash. Rather than engaging in honest jurisprudence, the three justices were motivated by delusions of “fashioning a political compromise they thought should settle the abortion issue once and for all.”
.
     The authors take aim at many other sacred cows of progressive jurisprudence. The famous police warnings mandated by Miranda v. Arizona (1966) reflected the Court’s “policy judgment” and not the text of the Fifth Amendment. The Court’s rejection of school prayer in Engel v. Vitale (1962) was based on a notion of the separation of church and state that is “found nowhere in the Constitution.” The Court’s 2013 decision striking down the Defense of Marriage Act was “cryptic and meandering in its reasoning.” Lawrence v. Texas (2003)—which struck down state anti-sodomy laws—is portrayed as an abrupt reversal of an earlier precedent (Bowers v. Hardwick) driven by certain justices’ desire to legislate from the bench. On affirmative action, the authors take a hard line: the plain meaning of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment “renders nearly all forms of state affirmative action programs illegal”—notwithstanding the Court’s continued tolerance of certain forms of affirmative action.
.
     While The Constitution makes a compelling case against judicial activism, the book is not without its flaws. In order to arrive at its critique of the modern Supreme Court, the authors have crammed too much Supreme Court history into a simplified narrative in which “substantive due process”—the legal doctrine at the heart of activist decisions like Roe v. Wade—is the central villain. The authors assert, for example, that substantive due process was invented by Chief Justice Roger Taney in Dred Scott, but fail to acknowledge that Taney never used the term “substantive due process” and, in fact, made only a single fleeting reference to “due process” in the course of his 50-page opinion.
.
     Turning to the years after the Civil War, the book faithfully describes the rise of substantive due process culminating in Lochner v. New York(1905), in which the Supreme Court struck down state business regulations, ostensibly for violating the “liberty” protected by the due process clause, but more likely because the justices simply thought the regulations unwise. The Paulsens, however, don’t merely criticize the so-called Lochner Era of cases; they label the entire period of 1876 to 1936 as one of constitutional “betrayal.” The years 1936–60, when the Court repudiated Lochner, is celebrated in a chapter called “Restoration.” But this is painting with too broad a brush. While the Lochner Era including some regrettable activist decisions, the pre-1936 Court was generally quite faithful to the Constitution’s overarching design of a limited federal government. In Hammer v. Dagenhart (1917), for example, the Court correctly struck down the federal Child Labor Act as beyond Congress’s enumerated powers. In order to stay within their narrative of “betrayal,” the authors condemn Hammer for “curbing the national government’s ability to address important social problems”—a criticism grounded more in policy than on constitutional interpretation.
.
     The authors are left trying to shoehorn the Court’s New Deal decisions into a tale of constitutional “restoration.” Alas, this was the era in which the Court tore down the Constitution’s express limitations on federal power in order to clear the way for FDR’s massive increase in federal power. The most extreme New Deal decision, Wickard v. Filburn (1942)—which upheld the power of the federal government to dictate how much wheat a farmer could grow for his own use—is depicted as “restoring the broad interpretation of national legislative power” asserted by Chief Justice John Marshall in the early years of the Republic. But that’s an odd kind of restoration—rather than restoring the Constitution’s text, the Court was restoring the (already-overbroad) interpretations that Marshall had asserted and that later courts had rejected. In reality, the Court in Wickard did exactly what the Paulsens argue against: it rewrote the Constitution to further its desired policy goals.
.
     In attacking the Court’s “rights revolution” of the 1960s and 1970s, the authors have to some extent accepted one of the basic premises of judicial activism: the idea that the Constitution is primarily about rights. It isn’t. The Constitution is a structural document—its purpose is to create a central government and simultaneously to limit that government’s scope. The document’s framers cared deeply about rights, but they believed that the best way to protect Americans’ rights was to limit the power of the federal government. The right to local self-government—ultimately enshrined in the Tenth Amendment—was the right that would safeguard all others. Though the Paulsens rightly identify federalism as one of the Constitution’s core themes in the book’s early chapters, they shy away from states’ rights throughout the historical narrative. They depict Jefferson’s doctrine of nullification, for example, as a tool that would be used to perpetuate slavery. In fact, the doctrine was invoked more often by abolitionists. With respect to the sovereign right of states to resist unconstitutional federal laws, the book claims that “the Civil War settled that issue once and for all”—an odd proposition for authors who insist that constitutional interpretation must be based on the text alone.
.
     Happily, the authors are on much firmer ground when discussing separation of powers—the other essential structural feature of the Constitution. The Court’s decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006), striking down the use of military tribunals to try captured al Qaeda war criminals was an “extraordinary” curtailment of executive power and one that President George W. Bush would probably have been justified ignoring entirely. The authors make the important point—one that continues to elude the mainstream media—that President Barack nObama has gone far beyond Bush in his assertion of unilateral executive power by claiming the right “to deploy offensive military force against other nations whenever he alone judged the use of force to be in the national interest, without any authorization by Congress” (emphasis in the original).
.
     All in all, The Constitution is an excellent resource for non-lawyers and lawyers alike looking to understand the role of constitutional law in American history. Though the book would have benefited from a more nuanced narrative and a greater attention to structural issues, the Paulsens’ piercing attack on judicial activism is well worth the price of admission.
.
.
E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center