Court as Supreme Is Antithetical to Founders’ Vision

This new article has been added to this page — I encourage everyone to peruse the articles there. Too few people have been properly taught about the Constitutional role of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Here is Louis DeBroux:

The judiciary was never supposed to be the most powerful federal branch.

The death of leftist icon Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, mere weeks before a presidential election, and President Donald Trump’s nomination of judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace her have thrown gasoline onto an already volatile election cycle.

While conservatives rightly cheer the nomination of former Antonin Scalia clerk and originalist Amy Coney Barrett, it has sent the progressive Democrat Left into literal screaming paroxysms of rage and despair and even prompted calls for a violent revolution.

Those reactions alone should tell us the judiciary today is far from what it was envisioned to be by our Founding Fathers.

In the Constitutional Convention, our Founders established the framework of the judicial branch under Article III, declaring, “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.” The Judiciary Act of 1789 originally set the number of justices at six, a number that varied between five and 10 justices before settling at nine in 1869.

The Founders saw the judiciary as the weakest of the three branches, called upon to settle legal disputes, but without power to exert its will as could the elected branches.

In 1788, writing in Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton described the judiciary as the “least dangerous” branch, arguing that the executive “holds the sword” and the legislative “commands the purse,” but the judiciary “has no influence over either the sword or the purse, and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither Force nor Will, but merely judgment.”

Read more: Patriot Post

Image credit: