Ted Cruz Proposes Supreme Court Elections to Counter ‘Judicial Tyranny'

[big_dog]

Source: Mediaite.com 8:43 pm, June 26th, 2015

2016 Presidential candidate US Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) told Fox News radio host Sean Hannity earlier today that the two SCOTUS rulings have marked “some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history.”

Cruz railed against how “lawless” the highest court in the land has become, and in a National Review op-ed, proposed a solution: judicial elections. And if Congress doesn’t do this, Cruz said, “the movement from the people for an Article V Convention of the States — to propose the amendments directly — will grow stronger and stronger.”

Yes, Cruz declared that “liberty is in the balance” with how the Supreme Court is ruling on these important issues, “untethered to reason and logic,” and the best way to remedy this is a constitutional amendment to “subject the justices of the Supreme Court to periodic judicial-retention elections.”

Every justice, beginning with the second national election after his or her appointment, will answer to the American people and the states in a retention election every eight years. Those justices deemed unfit for retention by both a majority of the American people as a whole and by majorities of the electorates in at least half of the 50 states will be removed from office and disqualified from future service on the Court.


Read more: http://www.mediaite.com/online/cruz-proposes-supreme-court-elections-to-counter-judicial-tyranny/

[onehandle]

1. Canadians should mind their own business. nt

[mac56]

42. ^ THIS ^

[hobbit709]

2. For a Harvard Law grad he's remarkably uninformed on the Constitution.

But then he's remarkably uninformed on a lot of things.

Ted Carnival Cruz: Adrift, lost at sea, and full of shit.

[cstanleytech]

11. Never been on a Carnival Cruz, hope never to go on one either as food poisoning can kill you

much like Ted Cruz as president could do to our nation.

[George II]

3. So he wants to CHANGE the Constitution in order to SAVE the Constitution?

[big_dog]

7. yes George II! and then we can draw up a new constitution because Cruz doesn't like this one...

Arbusto can play founding father with 350 million living subjects!

[LynneSin]

8. Would you do us a favor and take this idiot back home!!!

And take Justin Bieber with you too please and also Nickelback!

We'll keep Rush - I love Rush, the band of course. If you'd like that bloativated talk show host Rush Limbaugh we'll toss him in for free!

( I saw your Canadian Flag icon so I am assuming you are Canadian in some form?)

:hugs:

[George II]

16. Would LOVE to send him (and Bieber) back up there....

(BTW, I'm Canadian via my mother's Canadian citizenship, but Brooklyn born)

[yeoman6987]

52. If they take Cruz back

I'd consider keeping Bieber as he is a pain but can't destroy our country.

[Bernie 2016]

62. Sounds like my nephew...

Brooklyn born, has Canadian citizenship via his mom.. (he's 6)

[BillZBubb]

4. This cuban, canadian buffoon wants to gut the constitution.

Gosh who could have seen that coming.

[Monk06]

33. His ass was born in Canada

His asshole grew up in Texas

[bluestateguy]

5. Hamilton, Madison and Jay were mortified by the idea of an elected judiciary

And pretty much most of the other framers were too.

[bucolic_frolic]

57. Courts were for stability

above parties and factions and mob rule - public opinion.

The Framers studied history and knew political winds blow left and right, and
feared rule by the masses above all else. Rule by the masses is power in the
streets, chaos. They filtered public opinion with elections, property rights for
voters, Senators chosen by legislatures, staggered Senate terms, court
appointments often for life.

Cruz idea of judiciary recall or elections is pure radicalism, power to the dominant
party and shows quite some disrespect for minority viewpoints. He's like an
extra-legal Constitution. Very dangerous.

[rickford66]

6. Has he renounced his Canadian citizenship yet?

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

28. Yes

According to CNN Cruz believes that since he was born a U.S. citizen in Canada and moved to the U.S. at the age of 4 it's no harm no foul.

If he were a black Democrat the Repukes would be clamoring for his American birth certificate, but HARSIOK (he's a Republican so it's o.k.).

[rickford66]

44. There is some legal paperwork that has to be filed.

I worked with a guy born in Canada while his parents were working there. His parents did the paper work soon after his birth.

[spartan61]

9. OK, Teddy

I vote to not retain Scalia, Alito, and Thomas. And, Teddy, do you also think it was "lawless" when the justices picked W. over Gore in 2000? I bet you thought that was just great, you little slimy creep.

[fbc]

10. popular vote? sounds good. I look forward to the 9-0 decisions

Republicans would never have another supreme court justice.

[notadmblnd]

12. untethered to reason and logic

Project much Senator?

[realFedUp]

13. Why didn't this happen

Before Bush v Gore!

[Moonwalk]

15. It's only Judicial Tyranny when they don't vote the way...

...you want them to vote.

[lordsummerisle]

37. ^^^

[smirkymonkey]

51. +1000

Exactly!

[SummerSnow]

53. You're right . If the ACA was repealed, they would've praised them

[SoapBox]

14. Speaking of tyranny...

That is exactly what freaks like this POS and his ilk want.

They want to dictate your every move.

[samsingh]

17. sounds good, let's do that. then we wouldn't have the tyranny of citizens united and

stealing of elections.

[longship]

18. Suck eggs, Cruz idiot! nt

[restorefreedom]

19. good luck with that, teddy

it's only been in place since the time of john marshall, approx 180 yrs.

but i'm sure they'll change it for you.

[cosmicone]

20. Why does media give him even a second of time?

It's not like he is Socrates or Nietzsche or Voltaire damn it. He is just a village idiot from Texas elected because of his teabagging skills.

[big_dog]

21. yes, but millions upon millions of tea bagger GOP Primary wingnuts listen to him

my guess is that Arbusto would campaign in 2016 on a constitutional amendment, but he would still need a lot of the states and a clear vote in the Senate

[cosmicone]

24. They already watch him on Fucks News

No need to contaminate "real" media for them

[cindyperry]

22. worthless and dumb too

they are children in the last vestiges of a major temper tantrum they no longer have anyone they can hold up and say see by law definition and society's convention we are better than they are. sad childish bigots is what they are having a temper fit. fuck them

[big_dog]

23. its like a child when you take away their last toy

Last edited Sat Jun 27, 2015, 12:38 AM - Edit history (1)

right on, cindy

[stopwastingmymoney]

25. It has to be performance art right?

Someday he'll pop up and say haha, I fooled you!

Of course I always thought that about Ann Coulter too, hasn't happened yet

[question everything]

26. Of course. Has the votes gone his way - shudder - the justices

would be the smartest people on the planet.

What a loser he is!

[C Moon]

27. I hesitated going to the gym this afternoon because I didn't want to hear the rants from GOP'rs.

I went anyway.

I was on a machine next to an elderly gentleman. A younger man walked up to him and started spewing (very loudly) how the ruling was a huge piece of "crap." He bent over and whispered at one point, glanced over at me (I'm guessing he used the F word—not meant for me, but keeping it hush), and continued on.

He left for awhile and returned with more loud ranting, saying people were brainwashed by televisions and "some" newspapers (whatever that meant).

He left again, came back in a bit; this time he was loudly talking about why Romney lost and soon started spewing many derogatory, childish sounding statements about President Obama (silly word play).

I was done with my work out at that point, so I left.

I was going to report him to the front desk, but I figured I wouldn't bother the staff—who is probably paid minimum wage—and just went home.

I just knew that was going to happen today. But some how, listening to that Tea Bagger go off the deep end, made me celebrate even more.

[NBachers]

30. "If they have elections for Supeme Court justices, I could run for President of the Supreme Court!"

[MyNameGoesHere]

31. Why does this Cuba/Canadian want to overthrow the USA?

Oh right.

[Vinca]

32. Sorry, Ted. The Kochs don't get to buy the Supremes.

Even though it seems they've got a few in their pockets.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

34. Beware of the Tyranny of the Majority. It's why SC is appointed. nt

[sarge43]

35. Ah Tedders, the USC isn't Calvin Ball n/t

[paleotn]

36. Ok, Ted. Get to work on that one.....

....and let us know how it works out for you.

[tanyev]

38. You sure about that, Teddy? Scalia and Thomas might be the first ones to get voted off the island.

[stuffmatters]

59. Yep, no doubt it'd finally be a way to get Thomas out

Thomas has been a constant, painful insult to American woman for decades. He'd be the first to go.

Funny these prized RW "intellectuals" like Scalia and Cruz have become so irrational & stupid from their arrogance & hate. It's entertaining to watch.

[roamer65]

39. STFU, you POS.

You're not even a native born American citizen, so STFU.

[Hawaii Hiker]

40. I'll bet Cruz and his ilk had no problems with 5 unelected judges making law

when the case was Bush V Gore or Citizens United, or the Voting Rights case from last year...

[Historic NY]

41. Test tomorrow TED.....here's a cheat sheet so you won't fail again

[William Seger]

43. "some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history"

Bush v Gore, judicial tyranny illustrated, and the US has paid the staggering quantifiable and unquantifiable costs of Scalia's twisted and blatantly partisan decision in that case ever since. And we'll continue to do so for at least another generation. I'm not sure the English language has words that adequately describe someone who thinks that guaranteeing equal rights and providing healthcare are "some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history."

[MissMillie]

45. Sure, Ted.... as long as

the elections don't end up costing the tax payers money.... (/sarcasm)

Let's see how that works....

A justice dies or quits, then we need to hold a nation-wide election within a certain number of days.

Who is going to pay for it? Koch Brothers?


NO THANKS!!!!

[emulatorloo]

46. I guess Cruz never took US Civics and has no clue about how the three branches of Govt work.

Or he is a fucking fear-mongering demagogue.

[Third Doctor]

47. But corporate tyranny is ok right?

Cons only approve of the rule of law when it benefits them. When it does not they say tear it all down.

[Turbineguy]

48. He's right

we would be in for judicial tyranny if he had to appoint some.

[Marthe48]

49. It's been a great week if you're human

Ted Cruz has to be from another planet

[Half-Century Man]

50. He is going for the Citizen's United option on the SCOTUS

He is trying to open the doors for superpacs to infest the judicial branch with money as badly as they have infected the other two. It will complete the corporatist's collection.

We have a barely functioning government as it is, both at a federal and state level. Time which should be used running the country is spent groveling for donations. So, nothing will speed up an already overloaded judiciary like 30+ hours a week per judge, kowtowing to donors. Nothing will ensure equality like massive conflicts of interests.

While he isn't a stupid man, he sounds stupid by how he has to word his message. He will not survive politically if he just comes out and says he believes the United States should convert to a religious aristocracy. That a limited number of families, joined by common dogma, unfettered by regulation, lightly taxed, positions protected and elevated by cronyism, should by virtue of a sycophantic mask of government reign over us by rule of law.
The people he needs to democratically vote for the overthrow of their republic aren't as nuanced as to grasp the greatness of his vision with out a thick coating of bullshit and aw-shucks bubbaism.

[GarColga]

54. Be careful what you wish for, Ted!

Right-wing nincompoops like Cruz live their lives in a conservative bubble, surrounded by sycophants, blissfully unaware of what is actually happening. They need to keep something in mind when suggesting things as idiotic as this. The Republicans have lost the popular vote in five of the last six Presidential elections. No American who is not an idiot wants a Supreme Court that can be swayed by popular sentiment. Only a fool wants a Supreme Court where the Justices need to spend time campaigning and raising money.

[bucolic_frolic]

55. Ted Cruz was nowhere to be found

when Citizens United declared corporate money to be free speech.

Now he's lambasting the Court for "lawlessness".

How does the Court become lawless? The Court rules on laws, it doesn't
make them. Judicial activism is a hoax, of course they have to interpret laws
because laws cannot see the future or include every possibility forever.

Cruz is overreaching. Stone cold nuts. McCarthyism in full stride.

[sofa king]

56. Because that's how you find a qualified judge...

... ask ignorant-ass Americans to pick their favorite legal expert, then let that person interpret the Constitution.

"Hello, I'm Justice Nancy Grace, deliberating from Aruba!"

[jmowreader]

58. I have a better idea

Civics examinations for all elected officials. We'll build a bank of...oh, 10,000 questions written by prominent scholars of civics and reviewed for political neutrality should do it. A computer will choose 100 questions at random. You have to take this test every time you run for office, every time you stand for reelection and every time you run for either higher or lower office - maybe Ted Cruz decides he's had enough of senatorial duty, but not of public disservice, and runs for the water board in his county. You have to score 85 percent. If you fail, you have to step out of the public eye for two years to study civics again, and pass two tests before you can go back into elected life.

[Stonepounder]

60. plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

When the court rules on things Republicans like that are all smiles. When the court rules on things they don't like, they want to destroy the court. I remember the billboards in the '60's "Save the Republic. Impeach Earl Warren". It never changes.

Although I don't recall those of us on the left trying to destroy SCOTUS or amending the Constitution to take away its power when we disagreed with Citizens United. We criticized the decision. We lobbied for a Constitutional Amendment to change campaign finance laws. We criticized the judicial reasoning of giving corporations 'personhood'. But we didn't suggest dismantling the court. But that seems to be the Republican answer to anything they don't agree with.

<sigh>

[mwooldri]

61. An excellent idea on how to further politicize the SC.

I personally don't like the idea of elected judges. . I believe the law is a profession and that worthy and qualified individuals should be appointed to the judiciary by their peers. Having the Supreme Court judges be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate is political enough.

Ted Cruz's idea isn't silly but it's counterproductive to his stated aim of a less political court. .

[moondust]

63. In 2010 Iowa recalled three SC "gay marriage" judges.

Last edited Sat Jun 27, 2015, 11:39 PM - Edit history (1)

Including the Chief Justice who was an appointee of the current Republican governor.

(In 2009) Iowa's seven justices declared that a law barring same-sex marriage violated the constitution's equal-protection rights of gay and lesbian couples who wish to marry.

http://archive.desmoinesregister.com/article/20101103/NEWS09/11030390/Iowans-dismiss-three-justices

Of course 2010 had a low Dem turnout but lots of newly minted Teabaggers hating on Obama and funded by Kochs/FreedomWorks/etc. Not a very representative sample of the electorate. I doubt many sane midterm voters were motivated to run to the polls because of judicial recalls.

That's probably the dream of the Carnival Cruz: continuous political pressure placed on judges and endless recalls over any rulings he doesn't like.

[brooklynite]

64. Psst, Ted: want a reminder of who won the last two national elections?

be careful of what you ask for...

[Little Tich]

65. That's a great idea, because democracies don't need an impartial judicial branch anyway...