The potential impact of the Supreme Court's rulings on Friday cannot be overstated — particularly the high court's decision that handed President Donald Trump a major victory in a set of consolidated cases involving birthright citizenship: limiting the ability of lower courts to issue decisions that impede immigration policies nationwide.
Needless to say, the left-wing media sock puppets, along with the entirety of the Democrat Party, were apoplectic over the decision — a decision that will hopefully stop or greatly diminish the ability of left-wing judges to legislate from the bench, based on their own political beliefs.
One of many meltdowns happened on MSNBC (where else?) on Friday when host Ana Cabrera trotted out left-wing legal panelists who joined her in collectively panicking about the court limiting the scope of lower courts. Cabrera herself proclaimed:
This sounds like a giant win for the Trump administration and could likely trigger chaos now across the country.
Wrong, Ms. Cabrera.
It was a big win for the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law in America. Did Trump win bigly as a result of the decision? Yes, as did law-abiding, patriotic Americans across the fruited plain.
ALSO READ: Big: Supreme Court Rules on Nationwide Injunctions in Birthright Citizenship Cases
Panelist Leah Litman, a professor of law at the University of Michigan Law School, misguidedly said at one point (emphasis, mine):
I just want to note the Democratic appointees’ strong dissents in this case. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson calls the court's decision, “an existential threat to the rule of law.” Justice Sotomayor's dissent says, “no right is safe in the new legal regime the court creates.” She calls the court, “complicit in a grave attack on our system of law.”
While Litman is just one of many unknown law professors polluting the no-longer-hallowed halls of academia, Justices Jackson's and Sotomayor's theatrical hyperbole, in my opinion, were in violation of both the court's constitutional oath and judicial oath.
In reality, the Supreme Court's conservative justices took away the lower courts' most abused tool: attempting to impede, if not deny, the Trump administration's efforts to implement policies reserved for the executive branch. That is, in instances not deemed unconstitutional and/or unlawful by SCOTUS.
As noted above, Cabrera expressed concern that the decision "could likely trigger chaos now across the country."
As we've seen, any "triggered chaos," Ms. Cabrera, has been at the hands of anti-ICE, pro-illegal alien activists (rioters)— not President Trump.
MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin weighed in with this beauty:
Attorney General [Matt] Platkin in New Jersey told me, and I'm reading from our transcript, “I think it's fair to say, today, your rights and privileges as an American citizen vary based on what state you live in. So, if you want to be free from gun violence, if you want to make sure you have access to reproductive health care, if you want your kids to get a quality public education, all of those are meaningfully different depending on whether you live in a state, frankly, with attorneys general like us, or if not, so that when they created the Constitution and gave power to the states on law enforcement, on education, and a whole range of areas, health care, this is what happens when the federal government gets out of that space, and we are standing up for those rights.”
Correct, Ms. Rubin. Four words: as the Constitution intended.
If I'm a conservative living in a Democrat-controlled state like, oh, Colorado, California, Washington, or Illinois, and I'm opposed to the laws and policies of my state, should I not have to ability to move to a conservative state with laws and policies that better match mine?
Next up, former Sotomayor law clerk Melissa Murray opined:
Leah is exactly right. This is a huge win for the Trump administration, because the court has essentially kneecapped lower courts from stopping this administration when it engages in lawless and unconstitutional behavior.
And Lisa makes a really important point. This is all happening in an environment where the Trump administration is not only going after undocumented persons and deporting people without the benefit of due process, they're doing so while they are also upending the legal landscape by making it harder for pro bono outfits to secure the help they need from law firms to bring these suits.
And now, with this decision, they're essentially saying that litigants will have to file in each particular jurisdiction around the United States in order to be clear that their resolution will have legally binding effect.
Bummer, Ms. Murray — but again, as intended by our Founders.
In this case, the Supreme Court's decision freed Trump and his administration from (or at least diminished the effect of) an endless list of orders by federal district court justices attempting to block the will of the American people.
Yep, elections matter — and so does the Constitution.
Every single day, here at RedState, we will stand up and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT against the radical left and deliver the conservative reporting our readers deserve.
Help us continue to tell the truth about the Trump administration and its major wins. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member