Blogs For Victory

The Supreme Court reaffirmed Sullivan today – keep in mind that Sullivan was a rather tortuous ruling which had really only one purpose in mind: allowing Martin Luther King’s people to lie with impunity about Southern rednecks. The genesis of Sullivan (a government official in Alabama) was that King’s people had placed an ad in the New York Times to bring attention to King’s cause. All well and good: but they had fabricated several of their assertions in an attempt to paint King in the best light and Alabama authorities in the worst. Sullivan, the official most directly concerned sued and won – including up to the Alabama Supreme Court because there was zero doubt that there were false statements in the ad which had defamed Sullivan (and, by extension, the entirety of Alabama government). What the Supreme Court did is take valid First Amendment protections (we can say what we want) and turn them on their head by saying “you can lie about an official unless that official can meet nearly impossible standards of proof of malice”.

Nothing in what Sullivan – the person – did in any way inhibited even the most robust free speech. All he was going after was redress for lies. Not mistakes. Not misinterpretations. Not opinions disagreed with. Lies. Bald faced falsehoods which had no basis in fact. Additionally, totally unnecessary lies…that is, the case for King was strong enough based upon the unvarnished truth. King’s people could have retracted, apologized and then got on with it. But that would have been a win for…you know…those people. The Rednecks. Dirty people without proper credentials. What’s a bit of lying compared to the proper, Progressive outcome?

The Court might not have intended all the knock-on effects…but they have been devastating. The whole culture of lies we have in America today stems from the ruling, which made it nearly impossible to punish lies broadcast over any type of media. It didn’t provide protection for free speech – it just protected lies. It completely negated the reason for the First Amendment…to ensure vigorous debate about policy. Now its just a competition to see who can lie the most brazenly and crudely enforce their lies in the public square.

The Supreme Court also ruled today that it is Election Week, not Election Day – essentially giving States the ability to drag out that vote count as long as they like (ie, until the Democrat wins). Now, there is some basis for the ruling – elections, even to federal office, are under the control of the States. But, on the other hand, the Constitution does say it all has to be done on the same day. Not the same week (or longer). The correct ruling would have been all ballots received before close of polls on Election Day are valid – but while we have a 6-3 Court majority on most issues, it is 5-4 against on any issue which would seriously impede the Democrats. That is, if a Ruling would harm Democrat power in any significant way, we’ll find two of the supposedly Conservative Justices knifing us. That way they can go to parties in northern Virginia and point out that they screwed over those dirty Rednecks. Again.

Ultimately, judicial review is going to be set aside – it is something that the Executive has given to the Judiciary as a matter of courtesy. There is no warrant for it in the Constitution. Can’t stop the judges from issuing their rulings…but whether or not they’ll be obeyed is entirely discretionary. I’d prefer we keep the old way of doing it…but I cannot agree that 5 unelected judges get to make such clearly political decisions for us.

On the good news front, the Court ruled that Trump can fire FTC commissioners at will. This is important as it gets rid of what is called Humphrey’s Executor – a 1935 Court decision which held that Congress may via statute limit the President’s ability to fire Executive branch employees. This new ruling – Trump v. Slaughter – restores proper Executive authority. By extension, it might well get rid of all restrictions on firing Executive branch employees. This means that the civil service protections which have saddled us with liberal bureaucrats to undermine GOP Presidents might be gone. We’ll see how that plays out.

UPDATE: The Court ruled absurdly on the citizenship case…figuring that a person can cross the border illegally today and give birth to a citizen tomorrow. No sane reading of the 14th can sustain this…but the three liberals were joined by Roberts and Barrett who want sooooo badly to let their liberal friends know they’re really cool kids and can they please sit at the table?

Trump does retain tools on this – first off, of course, continuing to deport. Also, cracking down on those who employ or otherwise assist illegals to stay in country. Revoke visas for women of child bearing years. Lots of things…but, now, the Court has made it so that we’ll have to amend the Constitution. Know how I want it written?

Whereas only a complete idiot would think the 14th Amendment secures citizenship to the children of illegals born in the United States, this Amendment states you have to be born to two American citizens within the territory of the United States to be a natural born citizen.