Ruth Ginsburg, the Supreme Court Justice, died last night. This will be a testing ground for the election to come in November as Trump and Mitch McConnell move to fill the vacancy as quickly as possible. Mr. Trump had already released a list of potential replacements, his intent focusing on the next four years in an assumption that he would be reelected.
Before Obama left office, Democrats screamed for immediate confirmation of Merrick Garland, but McConnell deferred because it was an election year. As Senate majority leader, he was able to prevent the nomination from ever being considered for confirmation. After the 2016 election, Trump then nominated Neil Gorsuch to fill the seat vacated by the late Antonin Scalia whose 2016 death was, itself, a surprise and inspired some conspiracy theories.
Now, in another election year, Mitch McConnell is labeled by the left, and Chuck Schumer in particular, as a hypocrite because he intends to see the nomination of Trump’s pick through, even though closer to the election than Garland’s nomination was.
The only thing you can say about politicians is they will be politicians. McConnell was fully within the scope of his authority as the elected Senator from Kentucky, and duly elected Senate Majority Leader, when he prevented Garland’s nomination from proceeding. He is still within his scope of authority to process the next nomination, even though this is mostly inconsistent with his public reasoning for denying the process to Garland.
However, Merrick Garland was nominated after a mid-term election which repudiated Barack Obama’s and the left’s overreach. Through a Senate majority of the opposing party the electorate said they did not want more leftist policies enforced by an activist judiciary. Now, four years later, you have that same electorate still with their Senate majority depending on the Senators to act like they were elected.
Schumer, on the other hand, is hardly without his hypocrisies. He actually voiced in a public forum that Justices Gorshuch and Kavanaugh “would pay the price” after the next election! Words that from a conservative about a liberal justice would have been prosecuted as threatening the judiciary. But he excused himself by saying, “That’s just the way we New Yorkers talk.” Yeah, right.
How will this be a testing ground? Look for the “left” to rally, riot and cause mayhem for any judge foolish enough to allow his or her name to be offered by Trump unless said judge pays homage to the twin idols of the left, the goddess of Abortion and the god of Gender Dysphoria.
As you can see from that bastion of accurate news reporting (???), CNN, when Maxine Waters (D-California) in 2018 called for accosting politicians with which voters disagree, even some of her own party got kind of spooked as they considered the possible repercussions if some on the right took that tack.
If this it the attitude and composure (or lack thereof) by the political left over Trump’s administration back in 2018, what will be the outflow when he tries to appoint another Supreme Court Justice? If you watched the travesty of Justice Bork’s Senate hearings , where “borking” became a verb, that was just a foretaste of what is to come when Trump submits his nominee for the Court.
What the left cannot accomplish at the ballot box, they have depended on an acquiescent court to force through with rulings redefining marriage, justifying social engineering and transforming our society into a hodge-podge of anti-Christian values. Now that “originalists” are about to get a majority on the Supreme Court, they fear their last resort of forcing social change to allow unrestricted abortion and foster an anti-traditional family perspective is going to slip away, possibly for a generation.
What is most interesting is that even in the age of Antifa, BLM and socialism’s rise in the US, the conservative foundations of our country still refuse to metamorphose into the riotous posture of those who oppose them. The Judeo-Christian roots that seem to be slipping away in the younger generations still reach down far enough to constrain those who are angry at the injustices of those who cry, “No Justice, No Peace.”
Those roots are deep into the theme Jesus taught, “Whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them.” Beyond just the kindness to a neighbor, our ethics call us to love even our enemies. And that is a tough one! LOVE the protester who threw bricks through my storefront? Love the pyro who set fire to my car? Love the Marxist who feels like everyone else should give him in “reparations” whatever loot he may be able to steal?
If someone has “greedily” worked hard and diligently saved and prospered, how it is less greedy to demand that he be forced to give his legitimate earnings away to someone who just wants it and has done nothing to earn it? But, still, we are called to love even such upside down reasoners “who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” We must leave them for Father to judge, not us.
It is always sad when someone of dubious spiritual standing dies. Whether Ruth Ginsburg knew Jesus clearly enough to trust Him for salvation is left to speculation until each of us follows her through that Door of No Return. However, her legacy is stained by her political statements before President Trump’s election. Granted that she apologized for the statements which she regretted as “incautious” . . . but the internet is a harsh new master who will not forget, nor let anyone else do so.