Leftist Law Professors Openly Call for Biden to Go Full Tyrant and Defy the Constitution and SCOTUS

Beginning in the 1820s, Georgia began a campaign to exterminate the Cherokee Nation by force and removal. The state annexed Cherokee land, and Georgia led the way in pressuring Congress to pass the Indian Removal Act.

A minister by the name of Samuel Worcester was ministering on Cherokee land. Georgia eventually passed laws that made it “illegal” for whites to live on Cherokee land and extended Georgia’s territory into Cherokee land. Worcester didn’t leave. He and others were arrested by Georgia “police” and sentenced to four years of hard labor.

He appealed his sentence, and the US Supreme Court struck down Georgia’s extension laws in Worchester v Georgia.

Writing for the majority, John Marshall opined that the Indian nations were “distinct, independent political communities retaining their original natural rights.” Marshall declared that the Cherokee were a nation inside the nation and that treaties were signed protecting those rights. Marshall said that the Cherokee had the right to live where they chose.

But President Jackson disagreed. Urban myth has Jackson saying: “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.” What he actually said was just as tyrannical: “The decision of the supreme court has fell stillborn, and they find that it cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate.”

By refusing to enforce what the Supreme Court found unconstitutional, Jackson was the first president to act as a proxy king. He refused to abide by a Supreme Court decision.

In an op/ed published in The Hill on Saturday, Jonathan Turley has again raised his voice to point out that if the left got its way, we would be in the grips of tyranny. We are creeping dangerously close to witnessing a president acting as a proxy king and, like Jackson did 185 years ago, simply ignoring the court and refusing to enforce the constitution he swore to protect and defend. Turley writes:

In a recent open letter, Harvard law professor Mark Tushnet and San Francisco State University political scientist Aaron Belkin called upon President Joe Biden to defy rulings of the Supreme Court that he considers “mistaken” in the name of “popular constitutionalism.” Thus, in light of the court’s bar on the use of race in college admissions, they argue that Biden should just continue to follow his own constitutional interpretation.

The use of the affirmative action case is ironic, since polls have consistently shown that the majority of the public does not support the use of race in college admissions. Indeed, even in the most liberal states, such as California, voters have repeatedly rejected affirmative action in college admissions. Polls further show that a majority support the Supreme Court’s recent decisions.

America cannot function unless the three branches of government operate as they were intended. Congress passes laws, and if they comport to constitutional mandate, they are enforced by the executive branch. If they are not constitutional, the Supreme Court must strike down those laws, and the executive branch is mandated to abide by those decisions. What the president cannot do is simply act as a proxy king and ignore the Supreme Court.

Yet, here we are. That is what men like Tushnet and Belkin want and why they are dangerous. It isn’t just their opinions that are dangerous; it is their wacky call for tyranny to go mainstream and be disseminated and taught to others as an acceptable means to an end. Less than three years ago, Donald Trump was president, and men like Tushnet and Belkin were calling Trump a tyrant. Yet they clamor for a president they “like” to act as one, to be a dictator without a moment of reflection. If a modern president acts like Andrew Jackson and simply ignores the court and, thus, the Constitution, we would no longer be a republic; we would be ruled by a tyrant.

But Biden has already done that. Turley illustrated how Biden has already ignored the Supreme Court and ignored the advice of legal experts. He searched for and found a palace court jester willing to tell him what he wanted to hear.

America is on the edge of a cliff. We are in an actual constitutional crisis. One caused by a cabal of palace partisans who want to abandon the Constitution, but only when it suits them. They have told a doddering would-be king what he wants to hear, and he has listened.

This is what Tushnet has advocated in “taking the Constitution away from the courts.” Once the courts are removed from constitutionalism, however, we will be left where we began centuries ago: with the fleeting satisfaction of popular justice.

Larry Schwekart Twitter Thread

1) BACK TO BASICS

There are so many of you who are new followers that you probably haven't seen a lot of my longer screeds that explain some of my positions. So I'd like to take a moment this morning to review.

2) Basic 1:

The DemoKKKrats are the Party of Slavery.

Why?

As explained in my "Seven Events that Made America" & in "Patriot's History of the US," in 1820 Martin Van Burn, state congressman from NY, was jolted (as was Jefferson) by passage of the Missouri Compromise.

3)This concerned him because he thought it meant civil war. His reasoning: the MC set an imaginary line (34/30) at the bottom of Missouri: any new state entering the Union ABOVE that line MUST be free (virtually all). At the time, Dakotas, MN, IA, NE, KS, ID, WY, MT, CO.

4) To MVB, this meant that very soon, the free states could vote slavery out of existence. He knew the South wouldn't tolerate that. War would follow.

5) His solution was brilliant & horrific & affects us to this day.

6) Create a new political party.

7) This new party HAD to somehow attract anti-slave northerners or "don't care" northerners as well as southerners. How?

8) Bribe them. Give them jobs--party jobs, gubment jobs (local, state, fed)--in return for getting out the vote for the party.

9) The better you were at getting out the vote, the higher you rose in the job/$ structure.

10) This ENSURED gubment at all levels would grow steadily from then on. Always.

11) But there was a little more to his scheme.

12) They party MUST preserve & protect slavery. Remember, an attack on slavery meant civil war.

13) So--review--MVB set up a new political party called the DemoKKKrats to PROTECT AND PRESERVE SLAVERY.

14) A Guy named Jesus said you can't get good fruit from a bad tree.

15) That's why, ultimately, there can be no "good DemoKKKrats." They are ALL from a "bad tree" of slavery.

16) But MVB still needed more to prevent a war. STATES had to supercede the federal gubment. ("States' rights"). Always remember, the phrase "states rights" . . .

. . . whatever it means later, in THAT day meant "states' rights to have slavery." That's ALL it meant. Don't give me garbage about the "tariff." That was a facade for opposition to emancipation.

17) Last, MVB needed the presidency.

18) This is where it got a little tricky. He knew no southern slaveholder as of 1821 would ever again be elected president. But "westerners" (such as Andy Jackson or Harrison or Polk) were acceptable, deemed "free" of slavery (even though all had owned slaves at one time).

19) The other option than a westerner was a northerner who would support slavery by inaction. As one historian put it, "a northern man of southern principles."

20) Armed with the new "spoils system" of paying people to get out the vote, DemoKKKrats dominated til 1860.

They did have opposition after 1830--a RINO-type party called the Whigs. What was interesting about the Whigs was that they like the modern RINOs wanted to avoid the "big issues" (abortion now, slavery then). So they never took a stand on slavery. "Do what you want."

21) Not surprisingly, we only had two Whig presidents (Harrison & Taylor). Both died in office. Neither did a damned thing before they died. EXCEPT . . .

22) Did I mention that the "spoils system" caused gubment to grow? Even with one party? Now you have two.

23) What did you have to do to get elected? Give away jobs. Except now you have two parties COMPETING to give away jobs.

24) Gubment growth accelerated, even under so-called "small gubment" guys like Jackson. Couldn't help it. It's called the "Spoils System" or patronage.

25) So beginning with MVB gubment grows & gets more power with every election but slavery appears safe cuz you have a westerner (Harrison, Polk, Jackson) or a "northern man of southern principles" (no dealing w slavery) every election (Taylor, Pierce, MVB, Fillmore, Buchanan)

26) They do flip flops to avoid touching slavery.

27) And DemoKKKrats had the Supreme Court since 1836.

28) The infamous Roger Taney, Chief Justice from MD, rendered the worst decision in American history prior to Roe,Dred Scott.

29) THAT decision caused the Panic of 1857.

30) Meanwhile in 1855 you got a new party, one that for the first time ever took up the issue of slavery. Admittedly, it was only slavery in the territories--I'll explain in another thread why that was critically important--but they did take up the issue.

31) Right out of the box, a party that stood for freedom nearly won the election of 1856. They needed only 3 states.

32) Then came the thunderbolt. In 1860, Abraham Lincoln, a Republican--a NORTHERN MAN OF NORTHERN PRINCIPLES--won. Guess what he now headed?

33) This big, powerful gubment that had grown steadily for 30 years--but nobody noticed cuz it was in the "right hands."

34) Uh oh. Now it's in the "wrong" hands.

35) If this sounds familiar, this is EXACTLY what happened in 2016 when the . . .

. . . massive, spoils-driven, RINO/DemoKKKrat gubment that had controlled things since Reagan fell into the hands of one

Donald John Trump.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Larry Schwekart Twitter Thread

The DemoKKKrats are the Party of Slavery.