‘Leftism v. Constitution’


You are not signed in as a Premium user; you are viewing the free version of this program.
Premium users have access to full-length programs with limited commercials and receive a 10% discount in the store!
Sign in or Sign up today!

Judges in the United States are supposed to be impartial protectors of constitutional rights. Human nature, however, means it does matter who is appointed to the federal bench. Church Militant’s Trey Blanton looks at the outcome of appointing constitutional judges instead of political cronies.

A Trump-appointed judge determined last week Colorado representative Lauren Boebert could block Democrat state representative Bri Buentello on her personal Twitter account. Buentello complained blocking her violated free speech, after tweeting, “You’re a seditionist who is trying to avoid the consequences of your words and actions. Stop disgracing this state and your office. Resign.”

Boebert is not accused of preventing anyone from speaking on their own platform, and her constituents can find policy decisions on her congressional website and official Twitter feed.

Unelected Joe Biden has faced multiple roadblocks from Trump judges who have put on ice many of the fake Catholic’s harmful agenda items. A Louisiana federal judge, on June 15, said Biden offered no “rational explanation” for banning new oil and gas leases. Louisiana senator Bill Cassidy said of Biden’s decision, “And that is bad for the worker. It’s bad for the environment. It’s bad for our country. It’s bad for the world.”

Judge Terry Doughty also agreed with state plaintiffs who told the court Biden’s ban would cause irreparable injury from loss of jobs and income.

Last month, a three-judge panel with the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, blocked a racial policy by the Biden administration. Biden attempted to direct federal aid specifically to women and non-white restaurant owners and farmers. Trump-appointee Amul Thapar said, “The policy’s use of race violates equal protection.” Stephen Miller, America First Legal founder, spoke on Biden’s plan, saying, “It’s un-American and, more than that, from a legal standpoint, it is blatantly unconstitutional.”

An Obama judge disagreed, saying, “The majority’s reasoning suggests we live in a world in which centuries of intentional discrimination and oppression of racial minorities have been eradicated.” Conservatives view the recent cases as vindication after Obama-era judges stifled Trump’s efforts to protect the country.

In 2017, for instance, Hawaii judge Derrick Watson said Trump could not restrict travel from terrorist nations. After the ruling, Watson was photographed at dinner with Barack Obama, raising questions of impropriety. The Heritage Foundation provided guidance on the selection of Trump’s judicial picks. They selected judges who valued interpretation of the Constitution from the perspective of the Founding Fathers over modern political camps.

John Malcolm speaks on the importance of judicial picks, saying, “They will serve for decades, and, there are only so many of them, and they will have a huge direction on the course of law and hence on our democracy.”

Judges are appointed for life, which is why it is critical to elect politicians who are consistent with the Constitution rather than establishment cronies. Trump was highly prolific in appointing judges, with 234 in total, including three Supreme Court justices.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here