• The Owner  >> Originalist Lawyer Confirmed For US Supreme Court
  • .

Originalist Lawyer Confirmed For US Supreme Court


US Senate confirmed Judge Amy Coney Barrett on Monday night in a vote.

The confirmation is another achievement of President Donald Trump who sees his third nominee to be Supreme Court justice. Judge Barrett was confirmed by 52 votes to 48.

Although the media reporting this news is using liberally labels of "conservative" vs. "liberal" judge, none of these reports explain the meaning of these notions.

At first, the US Founding Fathers did not intend for the US Supreme Court such a decisive role it has in the contemporary political system. In Federalist Paper 81, Alexander Hamilton expressed a high view of the Supreme Court as a separate body that would rarely cause harm to the intent of Congress: “... the supposed danger of judiciary encroachments on the legislative authority ... is in reality a phantom. Particular misconstructions and contraventions of the will of the legislature may now and then happen; but they can never be so extensive as to amount to an inconvenience, or in any sensible degree to affect the order of the political system.”

Contemporary understanding of judicial power, shaped partly by the Progressives, is inconsistent with the idea described by the Founding Fathers Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. The check on other branches does not present the first function of the courts. Moreover, nowhere in the original documents, judges are portrayed as rulers or final authority over the great moral issues of the times facing society. Most importantly, Founders did not see the Supreme Court as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitutional meaning, unaccountable to any other institution.

Democrats Rage vs President Trump Who Is A Barrier to Progressive Order

These changes occurred due to the influence of Progressives' views shared by the Democratic Party, who wanted to inscribe a right to abortion to human rights and, most recently, also Obamacare, healthcare. The Democratic Party's intention of approval of "guaranteed minimum income" or an ideology of "gender-neutralism" as constitutional are examples of such imposition of the progressive agenda.

According to the Founding Fathers' vision, the judges are not the final authority on such broad modern concepts.

Had the Conservative Judges constituted the majority during the infamous Roe vs. Wade case in 1973, the Supreme Court would refuse to issue a final opinion leaving it for local courts to decide on every single case. In the opinion of some lawyers, this case is an example of how the Court exceeded its powers.

Judge Ms. Barret will represent the views of Founding Fathers will help return the Supreme Court to its constitutional boundaries opposing the ruling over the issues in which the Court has no competency.

It is a core issue of the rage and fury of the Democratic Party against her nomination, and more broadly to the US President Donald Trump Presidency, who reversed some part of the progressive agenda in the United States.


Go back

Economy & Investment