Bull Hedging
  • Politics
  • Stocks
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Politics
  • Stocks
  • Business
  • Investing

Bull Hedging

Politics

JONATHAN TURLEY: Biden’s veto of Judges Act makes him a craven partisan, not a Framer

by admin December 27, 2024
December 27, 2024
JONATHAN TURLEY: Biden’s veto of Judges Act makes him a craven partisan, not a Framer

In an age of advocacy journalism, April Ryan has long been a standout. Ryan routinely engaged in diatribes in White House press conferences during the Trump Administration and has openly opposed all things Republican or conservative. Now, the MSNBC contributor and Grio White House correspondent has declared that President Joe Biden was a ‘standard-bearer for what the Founding Fathers put in place.’ The reason? His much-criticized and partisan veto of The Judges Act. While even stalwart Biden allies like Delaware Sen. Chris Coons criticized the President for vetoing the badly needed, bipartisan measure to add new judges, Ryan declared it the work of a modern George Washington.

When the MSNBC host noted that The Judges Act ‘had bipartisan support’ and was needed to relieve the overloaded courts, Ryan responded by saying that an obstructionist partisan move is precisely what the Framers would have wanted:

‘It’s simple. This President Joe Biden, didn’t want to give President-elect Donald Trump a chance to add more conservatism into our courts, bottom line. I mean, you have so many people talking about how everything is weighed down right now. The White House on January 20 at noon will be Republican, the House, the Senate, what? Republican and the Supreme Court leans Republican. So this president wanted to ensure checks and balances.

…He is the standard bearer for what the Founding Fathers put in place. He wants to make sure everything goes well. And think about this, even though it wasn’t a federal judgeship, think about what happened with Merrick Garland. Think about the fact that Merrick Garland never got a chance to even have interviews with some senators because they rebuffed, they did not want to have a Democrat on the U.S. Supreme Court. In some ways, this is that as well. This is trying to hold the line, to make sure once again that fairness and equal play and checks and balances are in place.’

Ryan mixes rationales of avoiding adding conservative judges to retaliation for prior votes as a noble cause that harkens back to the founding.

Of course, as discussed in my book ‘The Indispensable Right,’ some like John Adams used the Alien and Sedition Acts to arrest their political opponents, but few point to that as the gold standard for the Founders. Ironically, I have previously drawn comparisons between Biden and Adams.

In vetoing the act, Biden once again shredded any claim to being a president who could put the public interest ahead of petty political interests.

Other Founders like Washington did not even support the creation of political parties, let alone endorse raw partisan moves by presidents. Indeed, Biden became the very thing that Washington wanted to avoid in saying that political partisanship:

‘… may now and then answer popular ends…by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government…’

The move by Biden is a disgrace. Our courts are overwhelmed by dockets that leave parties without any resolution for years. In 2004, the number of cases in district court pending for more than three years was 18,280. This year, there are 81,617.

If justice delayed is justice denied, our court system is becoming a tar pit of injustice, with litigants left without verdicts or relief for years.

Every responsible and independent group in the area supported this bill as essential to supporting and maintaining our legal system. The White House did not oppose the bill until Democrats lost the election. (Some Republicans also withheld their support until after the election).

Before the election, both Democrats and Republicans supported the bill in an all-too-rare moment of bipartisanship. Biden then vetoed it because he did not want a Republican to appoint new judges (even though the new judgeships would be added over a ten-year period).

In vetoing the act, Biden once again shredded any claim to being a president who could put the public interest ahead of petty political interests. It ends his presidency on a cynical, obstructionist note.

Nevertheless, Ryan and others on the far left are applauding the act as just what they want to see in a president.

It is one thing to discard any sense of integrity or responsibility, but do us a favor: leave the Founders out of it.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

previous post
Canadian ministers head to Florida for talks with incoming Trump administration: report
next post
Trump negotiating a new Panama Canal treaty for the American people

Related Posts

US citizen imprisoned in Russia given new 15-year...

December 25, 2024

Medicaid becomes flashpoint in House debate over Trump...

February 19, 2025

DAVID MARCUS: Trump should bring back Anno Domini...

March 31, 2025

SCOOP: Freedom Caucus threatens to force vote on...

March 12, 2025

Cozy ties between top Newsom ally and CCP...

March 13, 2025

JD Vance takes shot at Harris as he...

March 21, 2025

Trump announces new ‘serious power’ fighter jets for...

April 30, 2025

‘Viper’s nest’: USAID accused of corruption, mismanagement long...

February 4, 2025

Republicans, Democrats trade barbs in heated hearing on...

April 2, 2025

Musk’s DOGE takes aim at ‘viper’s nest’ federal...

February 3, 2025

Recent Posts

  • Emerging Stocks to Watch – Breakouts, Momentum & Upgrades!
  • S&P 500, Bitcoin & XLK: What the Charts Are Saying Now
  • MACD + ADX: Spot the Pullbacks Worth Trading
  • S&P 500 Slide Explained: What Past Price Action Reveals About Market Dips
  • Republicans look to stop China’s ‘backdoor’ tariff dodging scheme

Recent Comments

No comments to show.

About Us

About Us

Design Magazine

Welcome to Design Magazine. Follow us for daily & updated design tips, guide and knowledge.

Stay Connect

Facebook Twitter Instagram Pinterest Youtube Email

Recent Posts

  • Emerging Stocks to Watch – Breakouts, Momentum & Upgrades!

    May 23, 2025
  • S&P 500, Bitcoin & XLK: What the Charts Are Saying Now

    May 23, 2025
  • MACD + ADX: Spot the Pullbacks Worth Trading

    May 23, 2025
  • S&P 500 Slide Explained: What Past Price Action Reveals About Market Dips

    May 23, 2025
  • Republicans look to stop China’s ‘backdoor’ tariff dodging scheme

    May 23, 2025
  • Trump has not directed admin to declassify Biden docs on health ‘cover-up’

    May 23, 2025

Editors’ Picks

  • 1

    Small Caps are Set to Skyrocket in 2025—Here’s What You Need to Know

    December 12, 2024
  • 2

    Trump leaves China guessing what his next move is with unusual inauguration invitation

    December 15, 2024
  • 3

    Uranium Price Forecast: Top Trends That Will Affect Uranium in 2025

    December 19, 2024
  • 4

    Ad revenue should stabilize for media companies in 2025 — if they have sports

    December 31, 2024
  • 5

    Trudeau declares himself ‘proud feminist’ after lamenting Harris loss to Trump as setback for women

    December 13, 2024
  • 6

    Zinc Stocks: 4 Biggest Canadian Companies in 2025

    January 15, 2025
  • 7

    Lead Price Forecast: Top Trends for Lead in 2025

    January 11, 2025
Promotion Image

banner

Categories

  • Business (365)
  • Investing (1,182)
  • Politics (1,474)
  • Stocks (478)
  • About us
  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Email Whitelisting

Disclaimer: bullhedging.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.


Copyright © 2025 bullhedging.com | All Rights Reserved