There’s this whole argument being advanced by the right that a single “activist” judge (according to MAGA, an “activist” judge is a judge who rules in a way they don’t like) should not be able to make rules that affect the entire government. It’s one thing, they say, to make a ruling that affects the people before the court, sure. But a ruling that affects people NOT before the court? Like, a CLASS of people?

For clarity, say, for example, some unknown, mythical government was about to deport several hundred people based on little more than a combination of skin color and tattoos, without due process, making the deportations a crime. ONE of them manages to get before a court (somehow) and insist they’re NOT part of a gang and that they’re here legally.

If you’re MAGA, you’re arguing that only that ONE person should be affected by the judge’s ruling. The judge should be barred from, say, noticing that the entire process is a violation of the Constitution and putting a stop to it, even temporarily. Instead, each individual should have to seek justice themselves, on the same issues, over and over again.

Taking things on a case-by-case basis is a very old con trick. It slows the defense. How many can they deport illegally while each individual seeks their own justice? How many have no access to seek that justice in the first place? How frivolous is it, to have judges ruling, over and over again on the same issues, especially when the “issues” in question are so obviously unconstitutional?

Fortunately, nothing like that happened in the United States of America. Stay tuned to see how the world works in this Bizarro America. But when we followed the Constitution, no single judge COULD issue a nationwide order that stood, all alone. That’s because we have – I’m sorry, I’m still getting used to this, HAD – a review process.

You walk into a lower court and make your case. The judge rules against you. “No, you can NOT simply grab people off the streets and send them to foreign prisons without charge, hearing, or trial.” But you hate brown people. Are you stuck? Nope. You file an appeal with a higher court. That’s usually a three judge panel. You can sometimes request a larger panel, but at least three MORE judges are looking over the lower court’s shoulder to make sure the ruling made sense.

If you STILL can’t be openly racist and deport people based on skin color and tattoos alone, you take your case higher – to the Supreme Court. That goes to one Justice and then, maybe, to the whole panel. One to nine MORE judges looking at the question. So at a minimum, by the time the process is finished, the smallest number of judges to review a question is five. It could go as high as twenty. But rarely is the question settled with just one.

See, I wouldn’t want only one judge to have that kind of power, either. I mean, what if said judge was ideological in nature and ruled based on their love of a certain person rather than the words in the constitution? What if THAT happened? One might end up with decisions that rule the exact opposite of the plain English words in the Constitution.

One might read the words that say it takes an act of Congress to remove the “disability” of a person barred from holding public office if they have, say, engaged in insurrection against the United States of America, and then rule that it takes an act of Congress to engage the disability – the exact opposite of the words on the page! I would HATE that.

That would be insanity! We might well end up with a felonious fraudster in the White House, moving from one grift to the next, fleecing the Federal government as fast as their greedy, tiny little hands can shove money into their already overflowing pockets. That would be a terrible, dark, ugly day for the United States of America and I’m glad that we– Aw, crap…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Well, we’ve finally gotten a glimpse of 47’s brilliant and very easy but secret plan to end Russia’s war against Ukraine: he intends to say, in a very meaningful and strong way, “Stop it, stop it, STOP IT!” If THAT doesn’t work, well, he’s pretty much out of ideas.

One problem with 47 is that he invariably surrounds himself with ass-kissing yes-men who ALWAYS nod in assent and laugh at ALL of his jokes, and THEN decides that “everybody agrees” with him since he will not put up with dissent. In his mind, “Stop it, stop it, STOP IT!” shouted at people NOT on his payroll should work just as well as when he yells at employees paid to take his garbage.

Donny often reminds me of a spoiled six-year-old, laying on the ground, kicking and screaming, shouting and crying, pounding his fists and his feet on the floor and threatening to hold his breath until he turns blue…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Recently, I mentioned that the government was offering $1,000 dollar “Trump Accounts” to women if they would have a baby. I haven’t seen the fine print, yet, but I’m guessing they mean a white baby. They call that an “incentive.” Ever since I learned that, I’ve been thinking, “That amount will ALMOST pay for one month of day care!” After that? The kid is, entirely, on you. Wow, what a great incentive…