What are the new SCOTUS justices thinking?
There is a tide in the affairs of men. Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat, and we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.
—Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act 4, Scene 3
The new SCOTUS justices have to be aware that our United States Constitution is under attack, not just from anarchists, but also from numerous politicians and the media. Freedom of speech, the right to own a weapon, and property rights are all being attacked, and to a fundamental degree, our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is being increasingly denied. There has been extreme violence in several of our major cities, which does not meet even token resistance from their governors and mayors. Lives have already been lost. In addition, the rioting has destroyed numerous businesses, thereby destroying property and denying liberty and pursuit of happiness for those business-owners.
There is a report that the chief justice, John Roberts, is afraid of inciting riots and said he would tell the other justices how to vote. Considering John Roberts's actions in the past that appeared to be politically motivated, he may well be concerned that a SCOTUS ruling could incite violence. His determination to uphold the Constitution seems to be weak at best. However, the older conservative justices, Alito and Thomas, proved that they were willing to hear cases about the fraudulent election when they dissented in the Texas v. Pennsylvania, et al. case. So why wouldn't the new SCOTUS justices follow the lead of Alito and Thomas, especially when the issue of free and fair elections is so vital to our Constitution?
The threat of violence is always present in our country. That is why we have laws against violence and law enforcement personnel to enforce those laws (at least we have had). If SCOTUS makes rulings based on the threat of violence, then those who are willing to commit violence are in control, and our laws become inconsequential. During the past year, we have seen governors and mayors refuse to confront violence and even condone it. Consequently, it is only by free and fair elections that politicians can be held accountable and, if necessary, removed, so that responsible men and women can take their place. Free and fair elections are required to elect people who will preserve our Constitution.
The presidential election is the most important election to ensure that our Constitution is preserved. After all, the president nominates Supreme Court justices and has the authority to enforce the Constitution. There is overwhelming and undeniable evidence that massive amounts of fraud were committed in the recent presidential election. That fraud not only harmed other states that did conduct free and fair elections, but also harmed the people within those swing states whose votes were negated. Laws have been broken, and, unfortunately, the Department of Justice is shirking its duty to even investigate those lawbreakers, much less prosecute. So it seems that it is only the conservative justices on the Supreme Court who can protect our Constitution.
The reason for the Electoral College was to ensure that a few highly populated states could not always control election of the president. If that were the case, the founding fathers reasoned that presidents would be elected who were beholden only to those states, and the other states would suffer because of it, through biased regulations or taxation. If this fraudulent election is allowed to stand, then Joe Biden will be beholden to only a few corrupt politicians in four or five states, not even to people in the states themselves. In the future, those who committed this fraud will only refine their tactics to make them more difficult to discover...and election fraud will become pervasive and permanent. Furthermore, some of the Democrats have announced their intention to eliminate the Electoral College, make illegal aliens citizens, increase the number of senators by adding a couple of states, and pack the Supreme Court — thereby effectively negating future elections, eliminating coequal branches of government, and enabling the destruction of the Constitution. So one fraudulent election may be all it takes.
It is the threat of packing the Supreme Court that should be of special concern to the conservative SCOTUS justices. If the day ever comes when the five conservative justices look down the bench and see six or eight justices who will rubber-stamp any issue in support of liberal Democrats, then the conservative justices will have become inconsequential, and our Constitution will be effectively null and void. The five conservative justices will then spend their days trudging back and forth to their once exalted chambers and writing dissents that will be of interest only to academicians.
The nine justices on the Supreme Court have always appeared to be independent. That is why we get rulings with different numbers of justices affirming and dissenting. At least on the face of it, John Roberts does not have the authority to order the other justices how to vote. The necessity of having free and fair elections is so important that it seems the conservative justices would have simply shrugged at John Roberts's attempt to control them. And why would the new conservative justices not consider the effect of their rulings. They have already greatly disappointed more than 74 million of their most ardent supporters by not even examining Texas v. Pennsylvania, et al. Did they really think legal voters everywhere were not harmed by a few corrupt officials committing a fraudulent election?
The new SCOTUS justices will have other opportunities to examine and take actions to remedy this fraudulent election. Those actions must be decisive. They cannot simply remand the redress back to officials within the affected states, because some of those officials were complicit in the fraudulent election, and the threat of violence is certainly present. The whistleblowers who have testified to election fraud have been met with threats to their lives and even the lives of their children. An effective Justice Department would have immediately tapped the phones of the whistleblowers, put traces on their computers, and given them body cameras. Then, as soon as they were threatened, the criminals would have been arrested, charged, and sentenced to significant time in prison, which would have sent a clear message to anyone who plans to use violence to achieve their ends. Unfortunately, this has not happened. So, to prevent threats of violence to state officials, the SCOTUS's actions should be either to rule that President Trump has obviously won the election (thereby negating the fraud) or mandate new elections in those affected states or counties, with President Trump remaining in office while those new elections are carried out. And the new elections must be carried out in a free and fair manner, with observers from both sides viewing every step and maintaining chains of custody for all the ballots and the process of counting.
It is hard to imagine that the new SCOTUS justices are not concerned about the future and their reputations. We are not only at a crossroads; we are also at a precipice. If we go over that precipice by allowing election fraud, whether or not we ever recover is uncertain, perhaps impossible. Free and fair elections may well become a thing of the past. If the new SCOTUS justices choose not to fulfill their responsibilities, there will be millions of us who will condemn them for their lack of action — an especially bitter condemnation because we were once their most ardent supporters. But worse, when their children realize that their constitutional rights are being increasingly denied, they will eventually ask their parents the poignant question: why did you not protect our Constitution and ensure that I could live in a free country, as you have done most of your life?
An even worse condemnation will be the thousands upon thousands of lonely white crosses in fields across Europe that will forever stand in silent condemnation of their failure. To anyone who can imagine unspoken words, the voices of our fallen patriots will be loud and clear: we were willing to give our lives for freedom. could you not at least write a few words?