If there’s one prediction that we repeatedly hear which is 100% correct, it is that the United States of America are headed towards a constitutional crisis. Not a small one, either, but one that will almost assuredly rock our present system and produce consequences for years to come. And in some form or fashion, the cause behind it will almost certainly be related to the recent Regime efforts to pack this country with as many illegal and/or hostile foreigners as possible. And so it is with the current crisis that is brewing. Many have predicted that President Trump will be the cause of any such crisis. However, what we see taking place is not of Trump’s making, other than perhaps for his insistence on actually doing the things he was democratically elected to do.
No, the source of the problem is a small band of self-important, ideologically extreme judges who have taken it upon themselves to unconstitutionally act as an executive branch all their own. Acting without any regard for things like “separation of powers,” these judges have essentially usurped the province of the executive branch’s conduct of its constitutional duties (as well as the legislative branch’s, though to a somewhat lesser extent). What we’re seeing here is, in fact, a slow-motion coup d’etat being directed against a duly-elected president and an attempt to overthrow the mandate from the voters who put him into office. Acting at the behest of the transnational elite, who are still put out that Trump won the election, they are seditiously trying to subvert the American government now that it is no longer controlled by the Regime. Again, let’s make no mistake - the actions of these judges are illegal and seditious on their face, not just with respect to what is good for the country concerning current-day political issues, but also toward the overall constitutional framework in which our (formal) government exists.
This follows a pattern of similar behaviour that we’ve been seeing from jurists worldwide. In 2020, we observed the Brazilian supreme court judge Alexandre de Moraes order unconstitutional arrests and searches based upon “concerns about misinformation” (always a Regime tell), and more recently he sought to implement controls on social media outlets. The purpose of these moves, of course, was to limit the flow of information available to “the masses” so as to prevent them from thinking things that globalist stooges like de Moraes don’t want them to. Recently we also saw a Romanian court overturn the results of Romania’s recent election in which “far right” candidate Calin Georgescu emerged as the leading candidate after the first round of voting, overthrowing the election so as to “save democracy.” Here in the USA, it has been standard practice for judges to unconstitutionally step in an impose orders for any number of things ranging from policymaking to candidates “allowed” to run for office. Further, some of the same judges creating the crisis now were also responsible for a lot of the weird, extra-legal shenanigans that surrounded the railroading of many of the J6 defendants. All in all, there is a decades-long pattern of judges overstepping their boundaries in ways that always seem to tend in one direction - towards the enforcement of globalist Left priorities. Obviously, the use of judges to perform an end run around popular and democratically-elected governments is a primary element of the transnational progressive Regime’s playbook.
As always, the Left is pushing to accelerate and destabilise this situation with the purposeful intention of creating a crisis. Their use of corrupt judges to try to thwart Trump administration efforts at reforms is being coupled with other moves, such as the recent spate of stochastic domestic terrorism against Tesla assets (and owners), coordinated with planned “protests” designed to try to intimidate their political opponents. Having refused to accept the results of last November’s election, the Left is now trying to “save democracy” by undermining the will of the majority who voted for Trump.
My contention in this is that Trump and his people, as well as (seemingly) compliant Republicans in Congress need to agree and amplify. In other words, if the Left wants a fight, give it to them. If Regime judges want to get involved in roles outside their actual constitutional mandate, then give them some involvement - and give it to them good and hard. If they want to precipitate a crisis, then allow that crisis to be created and crush them with it.
I can see four ways, performed in tandem, in which this can be done. Each of these, of course, have both negative and positive aspects which must be weighed.
The first would be impeachment. You have judges overstepping boundaries for blatantly partisan purposes in ways which quite clearly violate constitutional standards? Put them in the dock and attempt to remove them. The conspicuous negative point to this is that it’s not likely to be successful. Regardless of how much they should be removed, they most likely won’t be through this route, simply because there is no way you’d get nearly enough Democrats in the Senate to go for it to get the 2/3 necessary for removal.
The positive is that you probably could get the Republicans in the House to pass articles of impeachment. And even though this won’t go anywhere in the Senate, it still provides a means of discrediting the reputation and authority of these judges, merely by the fact that they are now “impeached justice Corrie Ruption.” Plus, attaching various types of complaints, etc. against them could go as far as getting them disbarred, if you know how to play your cards right. Utilise the current political and legal environment to achieve this because we may not have that environment forever.
The second approach is to interdict these judges. Use various congressional means to either remove them or to remove their ability to even issue judgments on these matters. Congress has the power to define the limits of lower courts and could thus place presidential actions outside their jurisdiction entirely. Congress can also unmake and remake all circuits and districts below the level of SCOTUS and could simply redefine these judges out of their jobs.
The negative to this is this could have a detrimental effect on the timely deliverance of judicial decisions if cases have to be shifted to new courts, etc. etc. However, the positive side to this is that the Constitution explicitly states that Congress has these powers and thus these actions are not really challengeable on any legal grounds, no matter how much the Left might want to try.
The third approach is to investigate these judges. In the very least, many of these judges have conflict of interest issues that should rightly bar them being involved with any of these cases. The judge who recently tried to countermand the ban on transgenders in the military has a history of open activism with the Democratic Party and has donated to many left-wing causes. Judge Boasberg, who tried to block the Tren de Aragua deportation flights recently, failed to disclose that he has a daughter who works for a 501c3 named “Partners for Justice” which receives federal awards monies and which, among other things, provides legal services to illegal aliens. Along that line, Judge Boasberg also somehow manages to live in a $2.4 million dollar home in a swanky, exclusive DC neighbourhood on his $247,000 salary. Several of the judges making these recent rulings, as well as Chief Justice John Roberts and several key players in the Obama and Biden administrations, belong to a secretive club with ties to several left-wing groups, raising the question of whether there might be behind-the-scenes coordination taking place. This would be a glaring breach of judicial ethics if this were the case. Further, Roberts himself has links to a $oros funded legal foundation. All in all, the principle of “where there’s smoke there’s fire” should apply and there need to be some official investigations that take place.
The negative to this is that the legacy media and other outlets will obviously jump all over it to cast it as “political targeting.” But then again, they might find out that, as with a lot of other things the Left has tried to raise a stink about, nobody outside their smallish self-contained fact-space even gives a hoot. An undeniable positive, on the other hand, would be that the public interest is objectively served by removing corrupt judges who can be shown to no longer satisfy the “good behaviour” clause of the Constitution.
The last option is to simply start ignoring these judges. After all, there really are few available options for judges if the other branches of government simply reject their orders and injunctions. Even the Founders recognised that the judicial branch’s power largely derived from its appearance of propriety and even-handed, but this is a moral authority which judges were fast burning through even before the current impasse with the Trump administration.
The negative for this option is that, since it would represent a “final step,” so to speak, it is the option most likely to provoke an organised violent response from the Left. But the silver lining to that, on the other hand, is that they would be formally putting themselves into liability for punishment without question. On the positive side, what are the judges really going to do about it? The Framers already more or less recognised that if the executive and legislative branches don’t help the courts to enforce their orders, there’s basically nothing the judiciary can do about it. How many divisions does the judge have, and all that.
My recommendation would be to pursue all four of these options concurrently. Our goal should be to respond to the Left’s attempt to create a constitutional crisis in a measured and reasonable, yet also decisive, way. This forces the Left to look like the bad guys, especially if they keep resorting to (and worsening) their violence. Attacking across this broad front also keeps them off-balance and ties up their resources. It also provides the opportunity for our side’s articulators (including, most notably, Vice-President Vance himself) to have continual, very public forums to air out exactly why the judges and the Left are wrong, why their actions are provoking the crisis, etc.
Ultimately, our goal needs to be to crush the Left. We absolutely must keep this in mind. Preferably this will be done without collapsing into civil strife and internal violence, though if that were to happen, the Left needs to clearly be seen as the aggressors. For the time being, we need to at least be trying to “work within the system,” even though we know that the system itself is in many ways systematically stacked against us, despite our formally controlling many of the offices of government. For the first time in quite a while, the Real Right holds a fair measure of institutional power and it is in our interest to use it to the maximum extent that we can. Every effort must be made to delegitimise the Left’s institutions and artifices, to maneuvre them into the position of being the bad guys who are corrupt and “attacking democracy” and all that. If the Left resorts to violence, then yes, we need to be ready to respond with whatever force is needed to crush them in that way, too. But it really is in the best, eucivilisational interests of civil society to avoid that if possible.
I must confess I hurry to read your post, since i never found one I disagree with.
Onward, my firend!
I have always thought that our judiciary had the airs and arrogance of a feudal aristocracy.