by Patricia Anthone, America Outloud:
SCOTUS upheld a 200-year-old precedent that proscribes criminal prosecution of presidential acts. Since the president is elected through a political process, the proper remedy for actions that conflict with the Constitution is a political action: impeachment in Congress, NOT criminal prosecution. Functional, sustainably governed nations do not cannibalize themselves by permitting competing political parties to weaponize the criminal justice system against each other.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
Although this ruling is being presented as a benefit only to Trump, affirmation of this longstanding proscription will also prevent the criminal prosecution of Joe Biden. His purposeful opening of the border to unlawful incursion by millions of people has caused yet-untold harm to our citizens. His actions were deliberate and cannot be defended by claims that the consequences were unintended; the massive invasion began immediately after Biden issued Executive Orders that prevented Border Agents from repelling entry and instead commanded them to treat every illegal border-crosser as an “asylum seeker.”
Yet this willful harm can only be prosecuted if the willful misuse of presidential power for personal gain can be proven. Prosecution of even this most disastrous policy requires, as a prerequisite, a provable, treasonous trade of US well-being for personal reward. Erecting a near-insurmountable barrier to criminal prosecution of a president’s policy decisions ensures that the political choices of the people cannot be readily countered by misuse of criminal prosecution.
Johnson v. Grants Pass
This ruling, too, respected longstanding precedent; in this case, deference to local and state governments in matters of local governance. Although touted by the left-aligned press in the sensationalized, Marxist frame of oppression, a ruling that “criminalizes homelessness,” it is nothing of the sort. It permits local governments to enforce laws and rules about the designated uses of public properties. Absent enforcement of such rules, city parks, bus and train stations, greenbelts, and every other public space are all subject to de facto ‘claim’ by drug-addled and mentally ill vagrants.
The irrational idea that pubic properties cannot be preserved for specific, intended uses by the taxpayers who own them has resulted in a virtual explosion of crime-ridden, rat-infested, and filthy encampments, “communities” of feral people whose tragic living conditions are being actively cultivated and then mined for social-service dollars and political capital. This Grants Pass decision paves the way for cities to take corrective action.
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, overturning the Chevron doctrine of judicial deference to agencies’ interpretation of ambiguous legislation will likely have the most significant single impact of any of this session’s rulings.
The Court ruled that the 40-year-old Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council decision, which established the so-called “Chevron doctrine,” fails to comply with the 1946 Administrative Procedures Act. Since the 1984 Chevron vs. EPA case, on which the so-called Chevron Doctrine is based, the power of federal agencies has become increasingly unaccountable to legal challenges.
Any legal doctrine compelling judicial deference to the statutory interpretations of unelected (and therefore largely unaccountable) bureaucrats defies and ultimately undermines the Constitution’s provisions for subjecting legislative power to recourse by the people. This (likely intentional) result is achieved because deferring to bureaucrats rather than demanding unambiguous, functional laws from Congress encourages legislators to abdicate their legislative responsibility to faceless administrators whose jobs are not threatened by political dissent.
Why risk political capital on crafting specific, usable laws when we can simply craft and pass ideological warm fuzzies instead? Congress has become understandably reliant on the political cover offered by the Chevron Doctrine, passing increasingly vague legislation and counting on the unelected bureaucracy actually to write laws. The result has been an enormous aggregation of unaccountable governing power by the agencies of the Federal Executive Branch, a branch increasingly peopled by Leftist ideologues without respect to the party of the president.
What had been a federation of sovereign powers, a federal government, has been transformed into a central government. American society has regrettably become nearly as government-centered as other centrally controlled societies.
This ruling will pave the way for widespread legal challenges of regulatory excess. And let’s pray we see precisely that. But even if we do, it will take significant time and consistent legal challenges to restore our government’s accountability to the governed. Per the Loper ruling, new legal challenges to agency regulation will no longer be hindered by obligatory deference to agency interpretation of vaguely written laws. But the shadow of Chevron will continue to cast a pall on our attempts to curtail agency power because the Court indicated in this ruling that previous reliance on the now-overturned doctrine will not, of itself, constitute sufficient reason to overturn previously decided cases. Had this not been made clear, the resulting avalanche of demand for overturning cases might have been disabling.
Read More @ AmericaOutloud.news
