New Market Perspective
  • Business
  • Politics
  • Investing
  • World
  • Business
  • Politics
  • Investing
  • World

New Market Perspective

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

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
New bill would mandate gyms to carry equipment for Americans with disabilities
next post
Italian journalist Cecilia Sala arrested in Tehran, Italy says

Related Posts

Chief Justice John Roberts pauses judge’s order for...

February 27, 2025

Trump opposes plan to pressure RNC into making...

January 27, 2024

Pope Francis urges Catholic voters to ‘choose the...

September 14, 2024

Former Burisma lawyer registers as foreign agent more...

January 7, 2024

State Department says it will ‘aggressively’ revoke visas...

May 29, 2025

Weeks after Epstein file fallout, a new deadline...

March 10, 2025

War-torn regions have keen interest in US elections

October 30, 2024

Trump’s tax overhaul hits GOP turbulence over Biden-era...

May 2, 2025

Dems eye possible Trump investigations if they win...

September 26, 2024

Haley slams Trump for Senate losses, calls out...

March 2, 2024

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free


    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Latest

    • Poland’s presidential election on a knife edge after heated election, exit polls show

      June 2, 2025
    • Ukraine targets several Russian air bases in large-scale operation ‘Spiderweb’

      June 2, 2025
    • How protests over designer handbags threw Mongolia into political crisis

      June 2, 2025
    • Drone strikes ahead of Russia-Ukraine peace talks leave Trump’s credibility hanging by a thread

      June 2, 2025
    • Climate activist Greta Thunberg joins aid ship sailing to Gaza

      June 2, 2025
    • Ukraine’s drone attack the latest in a series of daring David versus Goliath hits against Russian targets

      June 2, 2025

    Popular

    • 1

      10 Top Oil-producing Countries (Updated 2024)

      October 19, 2024
    • 2

      Powered by rain, this seed carrier could help reforest the most remote areas

      December 19, 2023
    • 3

      A troubling theory about traders profiting from Hamas’ attack on Israel drew much attention. Why it may not be so simple.

      December 13, 2023
    • 4

      Americans are starting to feel better about the economy and inflation

      December 13, 2023
    • 5

      Top 10 Uranium-producing Countries (Updated 2024)

      April 18, 2024
    • 6

      Rare Earths Stocks: 8 Biggest Companies in 2024

      January 12, 2024
    • 7

      Investing in Graphene Companies

      May 9, 2024

    Categories

    • Business (1,343)
    • Investing (3,219)
    • Politics (4,225)
    • World (4,179)
    • About us
    • Contact us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: newmarketperspective.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 newmarketperspective.com | All Rights Reserved