President Donald Trump and his supporters have been learning some hard lessons of late about the fairness of our justice system. Let us add one more to the primer. The leftist lawfare now openly unleashed on Trump and his backers is only possible because it is enforced by a left-leaning judiciary.
Last week Trump blasted the judge in his upcoming New York felony trial, Juan Merchan, for bias. In making this accusation Trump had ample material to cite. Readers of my Substack know that Merchan donated money to the Biden presidential campaign in 2020. In addition, Merchan’s daughter has been a prominent member of a Democratic consulting firm that worked on Biden's 2020 campaign, and is now at what one news outlet politely calls a “progressive digital agency.” Judges are ethically required to withdraw from a case when merely the appearance of bias is present.
But like a similarly invested and biased judge overseeing Trump’s J6 prosecution in Washington, D.C., Merchan tenaciously kept this case of a lifetime. He invoked as justification the opinion of a judicial “ethics advisory committee,” which did as such insular bodies always do and validated Merchan’s appointment to the case.
As the trial date approaches, Trump is making a last-ditch effort to remind people of the unfairness of his pending ordeal. He does so in the face of Merchan’s latest gag order impairing Trump’s right to publicly proclaim his innocence. Through social media Trump asked why Merchan is able:
to violate our Laws and Constitution at every turn, but I am not allowed to talk about the attacks against me, and the Lunatics trying to destroy my life, and prevent me from winning the 2024 Presidential Election . . . Maybe the Judge is such a hater because his daughter makes money by working to ‘Get Trump,’ and when he rules against me over and over again, he is making her company, and her, richer and richer. How can this be allowed?
In this country, such effective public criticism of leftist judges is simply not tolerated. Collective reaction from the brethren was swift. A sitting federal judge, Reggie Walton, granted an interview to CNN to try to discredit Trump. “I think it’s important in order to preserve our democracy that we maintain the rule of law,” Walton said in the interview. “And the rule of law can only be maintained if we have independent judicial officers who are able to do their job . . . .”
(Note: Any time you hear judges or allies advocating an “independent judiciary,” substitute “unaccountable” for “independent” to understand the functional result. Of course, we never hear appeals for such “independence” when the judges being criticized are Judge Aileen Cannon, the Trump-appointed judge handling his classified documents prosecution, or the few beleaguered conservative members of the bench.)
The Manhattan DA’s Office promptly demanded that Merchan broaden the gag order on Trump. Merchan agreed with alacrity, saying protecting his daughter and other partisans from Trump’s criticism was necessary to safeguard “the Rule of Law itself.”
The Liz Cheney of RINO Judges
Bolstering the courts’ self-serving censorship chorus was former federal judge J. Michael Luttig. A RINO extraordinaire basking in the glow of his new friends on the Left, Luttig condemned Trump for his “vicious attacks on the federal courts and the state courts and their individual judges.” Luttig says Trump’s objective is “to delegitimize those courts.” Of course, that these courts are rapidly delegitimizing themselves by signing up for such lawfare was ignored.
Luttig came to prominence recently after endorsing litigation seeking to remove Trump from the ballot through the Fourteenth Amendment’s Insurrection Clause. That ham-handed endeavor was so preposterous that the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected it, a vote that included the three hard-left ladies appointed by Democratic Presidents. But Luttig is now beloved by the shiny, happy people on MSNBC and elsewhere and can’t lap up their newfound, transactional affection fast enough.
This judicial pile-on reminds us the Left cannot abide criticism of their evil practices, and their first resort always is to censor their critics. Nowhere is this temptation greater than in today’s left-leaning judiciary. There we see exhibited daily the truth of Lord Acton’s maxim that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
There are of course great judges in this country who show integrity and mettle despite the Left’s constant hectoring. But for every Samuel Alito, there are 10 Kentanji Brown Jacksons. And the latter grow bolder every day.
Foxes Guarding One Another’s Henhouses
While the takeover of our law schools by progressive “Crits” years ago sowed the current rampant lawfare, many decades of judicial power grabs laid the necessary foundation for today’s leftist rule. The courts have amassed for themselves the power to have the final say on everything. This includes the conduct of their own members such as Merchan. “Incestuous” does not begin to describe the situation. The complete deregulation of judicial misconduct that has ensued has allowed an anything-goes environment of foxes guarding one another’s henhouses.
The courts enjoy this ultimate power because they arrogated to themselves the right to strike down any law or regulation they don’t like. “Judicial review” is the judge-created rule that permits the courts to toss laws they declare “unconstitutional.” First imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison, judicial review is not found in the Constitution. In fact, the concept was novel and hotly disputed at the state level at the time the Constitution was adopted. Thomas Jefferson, for example, believed each of the three branches of government should interpret the Constitution independently for itself. Early Presidents largely scoffed at Marbury’s assumption of absolute power for the courts. Rebuffing a Supreme Court ruling, Andrew Jackson was reported to have said, “Chief Justice Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it.” In the opening days of the Civil War, Lincoln seriously considered arresting Chief Justice Roger Taney, author of the Dred Scott decision, which minted a purported constitutional right to own slaves.
The Left cannot abide criticism of their evil practices and their first resort is to censor their critics. Nowhere is this temptation greater than in today’s judiciary.
But over time, opposition melted. A century later, the power of judicial review allowed a newly leftist Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren to begin destroying popular government in the United States. A cascade of rulings followed that installed an emerging tyranny. The court draped constitutional protection on violent criminals, illegal immigrants, abortionists, pornographers and flag burners, and others dedicated to overthrowing the old order. A nation that for years had successfully resisted the decadence of Europe soon joined its cultural slide, mostly by judicial decree.
More than any other institution, the Supreme Court devastated American culture and paved the way for our current dissolution and tyranny by elites. While this radical judicial activism was admittedly a hard problem to solve, politicians and other leaders who could have halted or at least disrupted this avalanche rarely even tried.
In response to decades of judicial aggressions, a number of conservative legal scholars as well as the late Professor Raoul Berger of Harvard Law School have challenged the notion of judicial review. But the tradition is so well established now that the best we can hope for is to appoint judges who won’t make things worse. The practical upshot of this regime is that the courts call the shots on everything, and judges such as Merchan can do as they wish.
Judges Are Above the Law
While Democrats enjoy preferred legal status in our new, two-tiered justice system, their privilege is nothing compared to that of judges. In the landmark case for which I was reluctant fodder, courts have ruled judges have special rights not enjoyed by ordinary Americans. These rights place them effectively above the law.
In Arizona, which has become arguably the most militant arena for leftist lawfare in the country, prosecutors face disbarment for the following:
Publicly criticizing judges. That includes calling out judges for working behind the scenes to undermine publicly approved crackdowns on illegal immigration.
Criminally investigating judges. Merely sending written questions to judges as part of a bona fide criminal investigation constitutes grounds for disbarment.
Charging judges or judicial affiliates with racketeering or crimes. In Georgia, the district attorney has charged no less than a former President of the United States with racketeering, to the resounding applause of the ruling class. In contrast, prosecutors charging judges or judicial affiliates with racketeering or related offenses invite disbarment by fellow judges circling the wagons. That is the rule even when the judicial misconduct is so egregious and deliberate that the elected DA, sheriff and senior charging attorney handling nearly 40,000 felony cases a year unanimously conclude that charges are warranted.
Thanks to the bald efforts to take down Trump through a compromised legal system, “lawfare” is suddenly becoming a household word. Yet that is so only because our courts have made this growing injustice the law of the land.
Describing sickening judges and lawfare against President Trump and others
is the stuff of nightmares made daily occurrences.Every day seems gets worse!
Historical account of how it has become
ruling power helps me understand what
has been unbelievable every day!How can our country survive if there is no accountability for such evil judges??