More About ‘Useless’ Justices
Last Updated on February 26, 2021 by John Galt
At American Thinker, Rabbi Aryeh Spero asks, “Kavanaugh and Barrett: John Roberts Retreads?“
To our disbelief, now that the election has happened and the reprehensible consequences have been revealed and implemented in actuality, with grave portent for upcoming elections, Roberts, Kavanaugh and Barrett agreed the case “was moot.” It already happened, they said, and thus it’s too late. In other words, we will never accept these cases, not before the election or after the election and we won’t acknowledge “standing,” either. This is blatantly contradictory, dishonest, a shirking of responsibility and, worse, an indifference to justice and regular voters.
The rabbi advances several theories for why these two justices have voted the way they have. He doesn’t get into the theory that they may be being blackmailed or they or their families may be being threatened.
Once again, speech is censored, votes are ignored, and the courts stand idle and unwilling to intervene. Are we fast approaching the conditions expressed by Judge Kozinski when he said in his dissent in Silveira v. Lockyer
My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.