Let's take a look at the next order of business for Congressional Republicans (assuming they'll get around to anything at all).

After the Clinton Administration had given us a balanced budget, George W. Bush brought back enormous deficits for no good reason.  No one complained.  President Cheney blithely mused, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter."

Then came Obama, who would have been guilty of political malpractice if he hadn't used deficit spending to narrowly avert another Great Depression.  All of a sudden deficits were a big concern for Republicans again, the hypocrites.

Look for deficits not to matter again, as gigantic and gratuitous tax cuts explode the deficits into the stratosphere.  No phony Laffer Curve can save us, either.  There will be a crash.  But Republican voters are so messed up in the mind that they'll gladly accept billions in handouts to the wealthy and to corporations, just as long as it means that Black people will no longer get a nickel.  That's their number one concern.

Trouble is, eliminating social spending, even when it actually goes to Anglo-Saxon trash (otherwise known as "real Americans"), won't even come close to balancing that budget.  So either tax the rich, or enjoy the Second Great Depression.  Don't expect any of MY canned goods, though.  I don't feel like helping those who made the disaster happen by voting Republican.

Sincerely,

Stephen Van Eck

Rushville, PA

The tenth member of the U.S. Supreme Court has been nominated and confirmed. Not nominated by the elected head of the executive branch and confirmed by the other elected body, the legislature. But by one member of the non-elected branch, the judiciary.

It was Judge James Robart, a member of the leftist Fourth Circuit Court who scouted a far more efficient path to SCOTUS; he nominated and confirmed himself.

Robart took issue with President Trump's ban on immigration from seven Muslim nations. That just didn't seem right. So he banned the ban. It was all so easy. Obstacles like the Constitution, Congress, and Supreme Court precedents were brushed aside.

The Constitution empowers Congress “To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization.” Congress, in turn, enacted a federal law that gave the president complete control of immigration.

The statute reads: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens . . . .”

Trump did exactly that. His executive order (EO) is firmly based on the Constitution and federal law. The EO reads:

“In order to protect Americans, the United States must ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles. The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent ideologies over American law.”

On the other hand, Robart's restraining order completely avoided any discussion of the presumed illegality of Trump's EO. Rather, in oral arguments, he left the four corners of the EO document to question Trump's remarks about Muslims made during the presidential campaign. In so doing, he ventured off the EO page and abandoned legal constraints to pursue his personal values.

Robart concluded that the EO concerns about national security were a cover for an EO “that drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination.”

But even if the Fourth Circuit agreed with the EO, Trump would still have to contend with the Ninth Circuit that put the president's order on hold.

The Ninth Circuit, also known as the “Ninth Circus” and the “Nutty Ninth,” along with the out-of-control Fourth Circuit, should be abolished.

In 1802, President Andrew Jackson, like Trump, had a problem with renegade federal judges. Here's how he solved it.

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution reads in part: “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.”

Old Hickory reasoned by inference that if federal courts could be “established,” they could be unestablished. Jackson didn't impeach or fire the judges; he eliminated their positions. Eighteen federal judges hung an Out Of Business sign on their front door and went looking for work.

Today that is politically impossible. We don't have enough Jacksons.

Where do we go from here? To SCOTUS. And that's a problem.

The Supreme Court has evenly split along party lines; four conservative Republicans and four liberal Democrats. If the immigration EO went before this court and they voted along like ideologies, a tie would leave the lower court's decision affirmed. Immigration control would pass from the hands of the Congress and president to the judiciary.

Fortunately, all that's changed.

When Neil Gorsuch was confirmed on April 7, he took his place alongside the eight other justices. A tie was no longer possible. The (probably) split on the President's EO would be a 5 to 4 (or better) decision in favor the Republican majority. And a defeat for the judiciary power grab.

Now, if only we could extradite the Fourth and Ninth Circuit Courts to their choice of any one of the seven Muslim nations listed in Trump's EO.

Wouldn't that be sweet!

Sincerely,

Bob Scroggins

New Milford, PA