Conservatives face liberal 'firewall' on Supreme Court

Conservatives  face  liberal  'firewall'  on  Supreme  Court - Daniel  Horowitz   urges   Congress   to   strip   courts   of   jurisdiction

The U.S. Supreme Court

Daniel Horowitz, a senior editor at Conservative Review and policy analyst specializing in immigration, blasted conservative triumphalism after the Supreme Court refused to rescue President Barack Obama’s unilateral mass amnesty program. Indeed, Horowitz warned conservatives not to underestimate how closely they came to absolute disaster.

"We are facing a ‘blue firewall’ of four post-Constitution judges on the Supreme Court,” Horowitz told WND. “And some of the others aren’t much better. Justice Anthony Kennedy is unreliable. Chief Justice Roberts is unreliable. And the lower circuit courts are mostly worse than the Supreme Court.”

Horowitz, author of the upcoming book “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges from Transforming America,” said America’s form of government is endangered by the constant reliance on unelected judges to settle the most pressing questions.
“We are now in a scenario where our country is controlled by one person, and that’s not Barack Obama, it’s Justice Anthony Kennedy,” Horowitz said.

“In general, we are always on the losing side of judicial supremacy, and this is the thesis of my book.  The Supreme Court was never supposed to be the final arbiter. Our Founders never would have envisioned our president doing something that not even King George III couldn’t do.

“Congress somehow lacked the ability or desire to stop Obama from unilaterally abolishing immigration law. But the judiciary being designated the one to put the brakes on him – that is just backwards. It is also very disconcerting for conservatives and people who support the rule of law.”

Horowitz argued the conservative victory in this particular immigration case is an exception. If anything, he cautioned, conservatives should be terrified at how close they came to defeat.  “It was good news but had Kennedy woken up on the other side of the bed, then we would be in big trouble with this,” Horowitz said of the decision. 

“This specific issue was something so manifestly unconstitutional. It pertained to overturning immigration laws governing the most foundational laws of sovereignty placed in the hands of Congress. The notion that four justices still found that to be constitutional is very scary. That demonstrates that every Democratic judicial nominee is wedded to outcome based jurisprudence. That is, because they support more immigration, they support the legality of the president unilaterally repealing laws passed by Congress. That should really scare conservatives.”

Horowitz pointed out the initial decision of the 5th Circuit Court to halt President Obama’s amnesty would have been unlikely in other areas of the country.
“Conservatives only won by the skin of their teeth here,” Horowitz said. “Because this law had national ramifications, [Texas Attorney General] Ken Paxton made sure to go to the best judge and they went to the most originalist circuit left, the Fifth Circuit, and even there the Democratic appointee ruled against it. That is the only way this survived. Every other circuit probably would have ruled with the four liberal Supreme Court justices and we would be in the opposite position right now.”

Even if Donald Trump is able to defeat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, Horowitz believes the battle to actually enforce immigration law will have only begun.
“Assume Trump wins and manages to replace the late Antonin Scalia with an originalist justice – we’ll just be back to where we were when Scalia was on the court,” said Horowitz. “And Scalia himself said the court was more leftist than it ever was. The lower courts are horrible on this issue. They are increasingly granting illegals more and more rights through the 14th Amendment. And oftentimes the Supreme Court won’t even take up those cases so the lower court decisions stand.

“If a President Trump tried to implement all these enforcement actions, you would end up with a plethora of lawsuits. The other side gets a lot more at bats than our side does in the judiciary game. And it will be them challenging all of our laws and actions, saying they are discriminatory or against human rights. They would even turn to international law. And that’s the process I warn about in ‘Stolen Sovereignty.'”

Horowitz suggests the only way Americans can ensure immigration laws will be enforced is if Congress accepts its responsibility to make the law and strips the courts of jurisdiction over immigration issues.
“The situation we have now designates the courts as the final arbiter in the issue of sovereignty, the one issue they should never have any input in,” Horowitz charged. “And while it swung in our favor in this one instance because it was so anomalous, because it was so patently unconstitutional, even if we get a Republican president, we’re going to be playing defense. Because we’re going to want to enforce laws, pass better laws, cut off benefits, enforce deportation. But every single enforcement action is going to be encumbered in court. It’s already taking place in lower courts and just about very circuit court is siding with illegals. Now we see four justices on the Supreme Court are siding with illegals. And Kennedy and Roberts as well sometimes.

“Congress needs to strip the courts of power to strike down immigration laws. What I don’t want is people to take this victory and say we should have the courts deciding immigration because it worked in our favor here. The political ramifications here are very narrow. It doesn’t force Obama to start deportations and it doesn’t strip affirmative benefits from others who have received amnesty.”

Ultimately, argues Horowitz, what is needed is political courage on the part of the Republican Congress. And he urges Americans to pressure their elected representatives to fulfill their responsibilities when it comes to defending the Constitution and the rule of law.

“Just this week, there are lots of stories about criminal illegal aliens released into our population committing crimes and they are undetected because the courts are mandating the release of criminal aliens and granting benefits like driver’s licenses,” Horowitz said. “The Supreme Court hasn’t overturned any of the lower courts’ decisions on other very consequential immigration issues. Generally, the courts are a major liability for conservatives. And one day, they will implement a juridical amnesty. Even in this case, we see every single Democratic appointee willing to put their universal values over our Constitution. And the courts are going to continue striking down state and federal immigration laws and enforcement mechanisms that are benefit.

“The lesson to learn here is that Congress needs to be the final arbiter on issues of sovereignty and immigration. Until then, we will always be on defense.”

Who REALLY rules America? Stand up against the unelected tyrants in black. Find out how in “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America.” Available now at the WND Superstore.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/conservatives-face-liberal-firewall-on-supreme-court/#!