Biden Makes His Most SINISTER Move Yet, Dominate the Government Completely

Joe Biden has unveiled his most sinister move in ensuring the Democrats dominate American politics for the rest of the century. Republicans in the House and Senate are raising their voices in concern, but it may be too late. The time to prevent this atrocity against the American people was January 6th, the moment has passed. The Biden/Harris regime is assembling what they call a “Commission To Study Reforming Supreme Court“.

Biden said to 60 minutes that he will assemble “a national bipartisan commission of scholars, constitutional scholars, Democrats, Republicans, liberal, conservative and I will ask them to over 180 days come back to me with recommendations on how to reform the court system.”


What Conservative or Republican Constitutional Scholars would support this?

Simply put, they either can’t find any or they’re afraid to say it. There are no reports so far on any so-called “conservative” members or “republicans” that Biden plans to appoint to his commission but we can definitely tell you the type of “scholars” that the left are listening to today according to Fox News,

“The Supreme Court has become too partisan and too political, and with a united Democratic government, the time to act is now,” Demand Justice executive director Brian Fallon said in a statement Wednesday. “The 6-3 Republican-appointed majority consistently sides with Republican politicians and corporate interests over the American people, and we must act before they rig the rules of our democracy even further.”

Senator Marco Rubio and Congressman Ken Buck joined other legislators on Twitter in calling attention to the administration’s efforts. Despite what many people think, the number of Supreme Court justices is not set by the US Constitution’s Article III which states merely “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”, but by the Judicial Act of 1869 (aka The Circuit Judges Act).


Not the First Democrat Attempt to Dominate the Court

For a little history: the tells us that “The Judiciary Act of 1789 established the first Supreme Court, with six Justices.” Over the first century of our nation this number increased to 9 and then decreased to 7 due to the Civil War only to return to 9 in 1869. That almost changed when in a similar situation, President Franklin D. Roosevelt became frustrated with the majority of conservative judges he couldn’t dominate and pushed for the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937 to add as many as six new Justices to the bench. Even with the thin majority in the House and a split Senate, with Kamala Harris’ tie-breaking vote Biden may realize FDR’s dream of a 18 Judge bench.

Stacking The Court Isn’t The Only Dangerous Idea

Despite loud and repeated calls for Biden to stack the court, he has publicly resisted this call, possibly owing to his stark opposition to it earlier in his career and the vulnerability a flip-flop on this policy could create. Judicial Crisis Network President Carrie Servino was quick to remind Biden of his earlier agreement with Justice Ginsberg, that court stacking is a “bonehead idea.” But this isn’t the only possible outcome of Biden’s Commission.

Bloomberg Law reports that there are five other possible plays the Biden/Harris regime can make. Three can theoretically be accomplished with a congressional majority. Two require a full Constitutional Amendment and are therefore the least likely.

Reforms Possible Through Act of Congress to Dominate the Third Branch

  • Term Limits -“Last month, when House Democrats introduced a bill proposing 18-year terms for new justices, instead of the lifetime appointments justices have now. Under the proposal, every president would get to nominate two justices per term.”
  • Jurisdiction Stripping– “Chief Justice John Roberts noted when he worked for the Justice Department in the 1980s, Article 3 of the Constitution gives the Supreme Court jurisdiction over constitutional issues with “such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.” This would suggest that a constitutional argument could be made for future acts of congress to include a provision that “the legislation lies outside the bounds of Supreme Court review.” This is directly challenging one of the most critical checks against a runaway legislative majority.
  • Supermajority Requirement– Under the same Constitutional argument Chief Justice Roberts pointed out, Congress could add provision to certain (or all) new laws that a Supermajority or Unanimous vote is required for the Supreme Court to act. ” “It would basically require so much agreement that it’s very unlikely that very controversial and divisive rulings could be issued,” said Sam Moyn, a law professor at Yale who has studied Supreme Court reforms.

Error: Constitutional Amendment Required. (They Don’t Have The Votes)

  • Forcing a “Balanced Bench”– During his abortive presidential run, Pete Buttigieg supported a theory of court packing developed by Professors Daniel Epps and Ganesh Sitaraman. “Under the proposal, the court would start with 10 justices, five chosen by Democrats and five by Republicans, all with lifetime appointments. Then those 10 justices would select an additional five from the federal appeals courts, who would join the Supreme Court for one-year terms.” However, this radical option requires a Constitutional amendment, needing a two-thirds supermajority in both houses of Congress.
  • Lottery System– Wait… like the powerball or megamillions? No. Worse. You’re guaranteed to lose with this one. Another hit from Epps and Sitaraman, plus it’s endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders. It’s as crazily overcomplicated as it is ridiculous. Check this out: “The proposal calls for every judge on the federal appeals courts to also be appointed as an associate justice on the Supreme Court. Every two weeks, a panel of nine justices would be selected randomly from that pool to hear cases, with each panel limited to no more than five judges nominated by a president of the same political party.” Epps and Sitarman, and Bloombert Law argue this is constitutional as a variation of “Court Packing”. Your author respectfully disagrees. This notion flies in the face of the original intent of the framers of the Constitution which clearly refers to the Supreme Court and “inferior courts” as distinct, separate bodies as was set by the framers themselves, who voted to seat the first court.

They have the Whitehouse, they barely have the Congress and now they’re seeking to dominate the Supreme Court to lay a stamp of “legitimacy” on their power. The “Fourth branch” of the press has been in their hands for decades. Federalism and States’ rights are so badly damaged that they may not be able to resist efforts to dominate them through the administration’s bureaucracy. This is why President Trump and his supporters have fought so hard and MUST carry the fight to 2022.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Article

WHOA...Facebook Executives Admit Meddling With Election, Backing Biden In Leaked Video

Next Article
DOJ Will Now Punish You for Following the Law

Biden's DOJ Will Now Punish You for Following the Law

Related Posts