Judges Not Following the US Constitution

When liberals get into positions of power, in almost every case they will abuse this power for personal gain. The “Process Clause” of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, U.S.C. § 455, “Disqualification of justice, judge or magistrate judge” tell us when a justice must recuse themselves from a case. The Judicial Disqualification: An Analysis of Federal Law Second Edition, Federal Judicial Center 2010 clarifies this by putting a fine point on when a justice by law are required to recuse themselves. You can look it up but here are just a few situations where justices must recuse themselves; they are as follows:

If the judge was involved in the case prior to reaching the higher court from a lower court.

If the judge has been counsel for either party (defending, prosecuting, or conducting ceremonies).

If the judge was the trial judge on the case that is up for appeal.

If a judge or family member has a financial interest (owning stock or being paid royalties) or personal interest (advocate for or against) the case at hand.

These are just a couple and seem pretty common since but the reason they were written into the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was because judges were taking their personal feeling and biases to decide a case instead of the facts and merits of the case. By the US Constitution judges are to interpret the law, not make it, but today we have a massive number of liberal justices making the law. All of our laws stem from the US Constitution and when you have liberal justices, especially on the US Supreme Court who swear an oath to preserve and protect the constitution that do not believe in the constitution as law; we have a problem. When these same liberal justices refuse to recuse themselves when the US Constitution requires it, this creates tyranny and the miss use of the justice system. This one fact by itself can take every right we have as Americans away. So let’s take a look at a couple of justices.

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor

The following are all disturbing statements made by Justice Sotomayor.

"That one’s sex, race and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench."

"I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color will affect our decisions,"

"Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see”

"Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.

Your race, gender, nor your ethnicity should ever effect your job of judging, these are statements from a female chauvinist and racist. What is more disturbing is that she says she will only see the facts she chooses to see. So evidence and truth means nothing to her but then again, she is a liberal. Justice Sotomayor does not view the Constitution as "Settled Law". To have a Supreme Court Justice with this type of view is disturbing, but we actually have more than one, and more than one who refuse to recuse themselves when the law demands it. Justice Sotomayor has already violated her oath of office and any respectable justice would resign, but liberals are seldom ever respectable and the law don’t apply to them in their eyes. For instance, when there was a Supreme Court case on the US Boarders, Justice Sotomayor by the law was to recuse herself. For over a decade, Justice Sotomayor served as a Board Member and Vice President of the open-borders legal advocate and long-time amnesty-activist, Latino Justice. I’m pretty sure that violates the “The Judicial Disqualification: An Analysis of Federal Law” requirements, but she isn’t the only one. Is this the type of justice who is above reproach? NO!

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

The following are all disturbing statements made by Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

“You would have a huge statelessness problem if you don't consider a child born abroad a U.S. citizen.”

“Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of.”

“I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in 2012.”

This shows that in Justice Ginsburg’s mind, she thinks America should take care of all the children in the world. The second statement bothers me more because what population or ethnic group is it that she doesn’t want too many of? That statement is as racist as it can get but she is a liberal so the media won’t say a thing. Her last quote is the most disturbing. We have proven to have the best Constitution of any free world to support freedom but she wouldn’t use it to draft a new one. She along with all liberal elitist would probably have all Americans turned into subjects instead of citizens. She also should have recused herself from the gay marriage case since she was an advocate for gay marriage, speaking at gay conferences and acted in favor of gay marriage. Justice Ginsburg had performed three to five gay ceremonies, one in the chambers of the Supreme Court itself. I’m pretty sure that violates the “The Judicial Disqualification: An Analysis of Federal Law” requirements just as Justice Sotomayor did but did she act respectively; no. On top of this, Justice Ginsburg just made an ass out of herself by commenting on a current presidential candidate which is taboo for a Supreme Court Justice. As a matter of fact, she was the first US Supreme Court Justice in history to do so. Was it because she was trying to pay back Bill Clinton by helping Hillary get elected for selecting her to the Supreme Court?

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan

The following are all disturbing statements made by Justice Kagan.

“And what my constitutional values are, are wholly irrelevant to the job, and so neither you nor anyone else will know what they are.”

“What my political views or my constitutional views are just doesn't matter.”

“Perhaps most important, judges will have goals. And because this is so, judges will often try to mold and steer the law in order to promote certain ethical values and achieve certain social ends. Such activity is not necessarily wrong or invalid.”

“In our own times, a coherent socialist movement is nowhere to be found in the United States. Americans are more likely to speak of a golden past than of a golden future, of capitalism's glories than of socialism's greatness.”

To start with, Justice Kagan’s “constitutional values” are completely relevant to her job because she like all justices swore an oath to defend and protect the US Constitution. If your political views go against the constitution as Justice Kagan’s do, then you should be removed from the Supreme Court. When you have a judge trying to “mold and steer the law in order to promote certain ethical values and achieve certain social ends”, they have just violated the constitution because their job is to interpret the law, not “mold and steer the law”. The constitution is 100% about a capitalistic country, when you have justice praising socialism as great, by the US Constitution, they need to be removed. Justice Kagan had the same conflict as Ruth Bader Ginsburg on gay marriage. Justice Kagan had performed same-sex wedding ceremonies which again, under the 14th Amendment mandates she recuse herself but once again, liberal justices never follow the law.  She should have recused herself from the Obamacare Supreme court case as well since she, as solicitor general of the United States, served as the head of an office responsible for formulating the Obama administration’s legal defense of its domestic agenda priority. Is this why President Obama appointed her to the Supreme Court, to get his agenda through?

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer should have recused himself from the Wisconsin-based Johnson Controls, Inc. case because his wife had ownership of stock in a company involved in the dispute. But as all liberal including people who are to uphold the law, Justice Breyer broke the law by not recusing himself but again, he is a liberal so what do you expect.

You wonder why “We the People” don’t trust the government, just look at the liberals actions who are on our supreme court not to mention all other courts who circumvent the will of the people. Imagine what all the other liberal justices on the lower courts are doing and who they are doing it to. These liberal justices are stripping away every American’s rights and if we don’t change it, we will soon be subjects instead of citizens and know firsthand the meaning of tyranny.

No comments:

Post a Comment