by Steven Neill, The New American:
Several leftists have already called for the impeachment of newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett in addition to their calls for packing the SCOTUS. They used the alleged threat of Justice Barrett siding with Pennsylvania Republicans to “rig the election” against the Democrats as a sort of “false flag” to call for impeachment and then court packing, much the same way the Nazis used Operation Himmler as a false flag to justify the invasion of Poland that began WWII.
Leftists of today are trying to resurrect FDR’s plan to expand the SCOTUS to circumvent its conservative majority.
Biden dodged the question of court-packing for months until an interview on the TV show 60 Minutes:
If elected, what I will do is I’ll put together a national commission of, bipartisan commission of scholars, constitutional scholars, Democrats, Republicans, liberal, conservative. And I will ask them to, over 180 days, come back to me with recommendations as to how to reform the court system because it’s getting out of whack how it’s being handled.
And it’s not about court-packing, there is a number of other things that our constitutional scholars have debated, and I’d look to see what recommendations that commission might make.
While Biden’s answer was “moderate” enough to please some voters concerned about possible court packing, it was also ambiguous enough to allow him to adopt any of the radical ideas the extreme Left is spewing out.
In the words of Republican Senator Ted Cruz, Biden’s response was, “Really chilling. Joe Biden said that his objective is to go quote ‘well beyond packing.’ The late President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried to add justices to the Court, but the Democrat Party rejected the attempt in 1937.”
The ideas coming from the far left following the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett are genuinely radical. PBS host Alexander Heffner, talk radio host Chip Franklin, and political science scholar Norman Ornstein have all posted opinions demanding Justice Barrett be “impeached promptly” should she not recuse herself from weighing in on an election challenge out of Pennsylvania.
If Barrett does indeed rule against the rights of voters in the days leading up to or during vote-counting — refusing to recuse herself from decisions that would clearly amount to a quid pro quo for Trump’s re-election — Ornstein’s suggestion is precisely the required hardball Dems need to play to delegitimize the extremist justice and preserve democracy.
By voting against the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and interfering in state’s electoral practices, Barrett’s rank duplicity will be unmistakable — as will the fraud of her purported conviction in federalism and state’s rights.
If Amy Barrett doesn’t recuse herself on the Pennsylvania voter suppression case going to the Supreme Court she should be impeached.
🖐 Raise your hand and pass it on if you agree.
— Chip Franklin (@chipfranklin) October 27, 2020
🚨 Trump’s GOP came for the #ACA in 2017 & missed.
🚨 On November 10th, one week AFTER the election, the #SupremeCourt weighs in.
— Leland #StayHome 🏡 #VoteByMail 🇺🇸 (@daft_editor) October 24, 2020
They refer to the Pennsylvania Republicans asking the Supreme Court to decide whether mail-in ballots received after Election Day should be counted. However, the leftists’ point on the Pennsylvania case became mute as the Supreme Court, without Barrett involved with the decision, refused to hear the case. This inaction allowed the Pennsylvania court’s decision allowing ballots to be counted three days after election day and the decision by election officials in North Carolina to extend ballot tallies from three to nine days following the election.
With the Supreme Court sidestepping away from the Pennsylvania decision, the left’s opportunity to use it as a cudgel against Barrett failed. Like the All-Seeing Eye of Sauron, however, the Left is always looking for a new angle. As Heffner stated:
On this basis, a potential Biden presidency and Democratic Senate will have the leverage to add a Justice — a tenth Justice — to begin the process of balancing the Supreme Court. It would be politically palatable if Barrett’s appointment enabled a plot to destroy the election’s legitimacy.
After a new Justice is added by a simple majority vote in Congress and sworn in, there can be a more comprehensive study, as Biden has promised, of new plans for the Court: term limits, additional appointments, and recusal rules. But the Democrats need to recover — not in months and years, but immediately — from Barrett’s appointment.