Supreme Being

Chief inJustice of the Supreme Court Merrick Garland

 

I’m just a plainspoken Colorado criminal defense lawyer, but the way I see it…

President Donald Trump has every Constitutional right to nominate whomever he likes to the Supreme Court. So did President Barack Obama.

In both instances, the Senate of the United States had every Constitutional obligation to advise and consent to or veto those nominations.

The Senate unconstitutionally refused to do its duty in the case of Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. The executive branch of our government — perhaps from hubris, or a failure of imagination to see that, disgusted with politics, the American people would take short-sighted revenge and elevate a television buffoon to the Presidency — declined to sue the legislative branch for that dereliction.

Now the high court chickens come home to roost in yet another revolting display of the bipartisan hypocrisy we’re wholly accustomed to see ooze all over these D.C. barbecues.

Neil Gorsuch is eminently qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice of the United States.

He’s just not the Justice to replace Antonin Scalia that, had the Senate any actual respect for the Constitution, the American people deserved. Maybe next time, but not this time.

Subscribe

Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.

2 Responses to Supreme Being

  1. Bapoo Malcolm 14 April 2017 at 1:10 am #

    Simply love that phrase, Television Buffoon. But what of the bigger buffoons who elected him?

    Am convinced that the Biggest Liar wins.

  2. Bruce Luyendyk 7 April 2017 at 2:57 pm #

    Too late. Schumer decided to be McConnell’s apprentice. Now we are really screwed.

Leave a Reply