Politico: SCOTUS Striking Down Roe v. Wade According to Leak

 

Do we trust Politico? Can we trust a leak from the most leak-free branch of the government? Here’s their breaking story:

The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.

The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

This is all very, very odd. The Supreme Court is famed for not leaking decisions before they are officially announced. In the past, there hasn’t been even a hint of which way a pending case may break. If the leak is accurate, it violates a sacrosanct tradition which will damage the court’s reputation and congenial relations between the justices and their staff.

The 98-page draft allegedly came “from a person familiar with the court’s proceedings in the Mississippi case along with other details supporting the authenticity of the document.”

One Alito quote reads: “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division.” The leaker claims Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett agree with Alito.

If the leak is genuine and Roe v. Wade will be overturned, I think this helps the conservative side, at least slightly. It lets some hot air out of the balloon before the official announcement, lessening any possible midterm blowback. Far, far more importantly, it will save babies’ lives.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 239 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax)
    @DonG

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):
    Last week, we got the news that Planned Parenthood plans a new clinic right on the Washington-Idaho border, to provide services to all those Idaho women who can’t get abortions in their own state.  Probably with our taxpayer money.

    I heard that California was partnering with Disney to create an “Abortionland” theme park.   Three days and two nights free with free airfare!   As a bonus you can get a visit from a Disney character while you are in the stirrups!!

    • #211
  2. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):
    Last week, we got the news that Planned Parenthood plans a new clinic right on the Washington-Idaho border, to provide services to all those Idaho women who can’t get abortions in their own state. Probably with our taxpayer money.

    I heard that California was partnering with Disney to create an “Abortionland” theme park. Three days and two nights free with free airfare! As a bonus you can get a visit from a Disney character while you are in the stirrups!!

    I actually considered the idea that people might scam this for vacations.  I mean, you can’t expect the poor woman to go through this alone.  Nope, she needs a support +1.  Plus a few days after to recover before traveling home.  And you have airfare and accommodations for two for several days in the resort town of your choice.

    • #212
  3. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Judge Mental (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):
    Last week, we got the news that Planned Parenthood plans a new clinic right on the Washington-Idaho border, to provide services to all those Idaho women who can’t get abortions in their own state. Probably with our taxpayer money.

    I heard that California was partnering with Disney to create an “Abortionland” theme park. Three days and two nights free with free airfare! As a bonus you can get a visit from a Disney character while you are in the stirrups!!

    I actually considered the idea that people might scam this for vacations. I mean, you can’t expect the poor woman to go through this alone. Nope, she needs a support +1. Plus a few days after to recover before traveling home. And you have airfare and accommodations for two for several days in the resort town of your choice.

    Scott Weiner is proposing making CA a sanctuary state for transgender “youth” who might be denied “gender affirming treatment” in their home states. IOW, if a state refused to let a minor cut off his healthy c**k, or her developing boobs, CA will accommodate him/her/it. 

    • #213
  4. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Django (View Comment):

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):

    Abortion is the Holy Sacrament of the Left. On my way home from the doctor this afternoon, I drove by an impromptu demonstration in favor of Roe, with all the usual signage. “We’ll never go back”. “No back-alley abortions” with the coat hanger drawing, and all that other crap. Our state Dictator attended a pro-abortion rally this afternoon. Washington already has one of the most lenient abortion laws in the nation, and I expect our heavily-DemocRat legislature to make it even more lenient at their next legislative session.

    Last week, we got the news that Planned Parenthood plans a new clinic right on the Washington-Idaho border, to provide services to all those Idaho women who can’t get abortions in their own state. Probably with our taxpayer money.

    Lastly, I would suggest that we cease immediately using the term “pro-choice”. Use pro-abortion. Do not use their language.

    Same with “right to choose”. If you believe in abortion, why are you unwilling to say exactly what you are choosing?

    Those aren’t the only examples. I once saw a bumper sticker saying, “If you don’t like abortion, don’t get one.” Well, idiots, if you don’t like handguns, don’t buy one! And don’t interfere with my “right to choose”.

    Same with insisting it’s just “women’s health care.”  Right, and lethal injection is just prison health care…

    • #214
  5. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):
    Last week, we got the news that Planned Parenthood plans a new clinic right on the Washington-Idaho border, to provide services to all those Idaho women who can’t get abortions in their own state. Probably with our taxpayer money.

    I heard that California was partnering with Disney to create an “Abortionland” theme park. Three days and two nights free with free airfare! As a bonus you can get a visit from a Disney character while you are in the stirrups!!

    Don’t give them any ideas.

    • #215
  6. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):

    Abortion is the Holy Sacrament of the Left. On my way home from the doctor this afternoon, I drove by an impromptu demonstration in favor of Roe, with all the usual signage. “We’ll never go back”. “No back-alley abortions” with the coat hanger drawing, and all that other crap. Our state Dictator attended a pro-abortion rally this afternoon. Washington already has one of the most lenient abortion laws in the nation, and I expect our heavily-DemocRat legislature to make it even more lenient at their next legislative session.

    Last week, we got the news that Planned Parenthood plans a new clinic right on the Washington-Idaho border, to provide services to all those Idaho women who can’t get abortions in their own state. Probably with our taxpayer money.

    Lastly, I would suggest that we cease immediately using the term “pro-choice”. Use pro-abortion. Do not use their language.

    The coat hanger threat was effective. Rather than succumb to it, maybe it is time to coldly respond that anyone who would do that deserves all the medical complications that will ensue, including sepsis and their own death. I have been treated so rudely over the years by these baby killers that I am done with them, we need to streamline adoptions and support pregnant young  girls to deter this evil.

    • #216
  7. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):
    Last week, we got the news that Planned Parenthood plans a new clinic right on the Washington-Idaho border, to provide services to all those Idaho women who can’t get abortions in their own state. Probably with our taxpayer money.

    I heard that California was partnering with Disney to create an “Abortionland” theme park. Three days and two nights free with free airfare! As a bonus you can get a visit from a Disney character while you are in the stirrups!!

    Disney and California can go to

    • #217
  8. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    EHerring (View Comment):

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):

    Abortion is the Holy Sacrament of the Left. On my way home from the doctor this afternoon, I drove by an impromptu demonstration in favor of Roe, with all the usual signage. “We’ll never go back”. “No back-alley abortions” with the coat hanger drawing, and all that other crap. Our state Dictator attended a pro-abortion rally this afternoon. Washington already has one of the most lenient abortion laws in the nation, and I expect our heavily-DemocRat legislature to make it even more lenient at their next legislative session.

    Last week, we got the news that Planned Parenthood plans a new clinic right on the Washington-Idaho border, to provide services to all those Idaho women who can’t get abortions in their own state. Probably with our taxpayer money.

    Lastly, I would suggest that we cease immediately using the term “pro-choice”. Use pro-abortion. Do not use their language.

    The coat hanger threat was effective. Rather than succumb to it, maybe it is time to coldly respond that anyone who would do that deserves all the medical complications that will ensue, including sepsis and their own death. I have been treated so rudely over the years by these baby killers that I am done with them, we need to streamline adoptions and support pregnant young girls to deter this evil.

    They want the right to choose everything except personal responsibility.  And we get to pay for their condoms.

    • #218
  9. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    I would have expected nothing less. The judiciary–a supposedly co-equal branch of government (please correct this foreigner if She is wrong about that)–is about to discover what it’s like to be subjected to, and torn apart by, the whims of political hacks up to and including the one occupying the Oval Office, and by their mind-numbed robots among the media, the glitterati, and the Twitterati.

    I learned from a Constitution podcast that the thought the branches are co-equal is incorrect. Congress has more power. For example, they have the ability to fire the other two branches, through impeachment. Neither of the other two branches can remove a member of Congress. The hosts claimed that the thought the branches are co-equal was started by the Nixon administration.

    Congress just won’t use its power and gives it all away.

    Going a bit far afield here, but I’ve said several times on various threads here on Ricochet, the fundamental problem that the American government is suffering from for the last 20-plus years is that we have a Legislative branch that refuses to Legislate. We haven’t had a budget since the Clinton Administration, and what legislation they do pass tends to be stuff along the lines of “The Secretary of <department> shall issue regulation to <whatever>.”

    Fix that problem, and you resolve a lot of issues of governance.

    My personal preference would be a Constitutional Amendment such that no executive branch regulation can take effect without a positive affirmative vote of the Congress. Make Congresscritters accountable for what the government is doing.

     

     

    A President could do this with an executive order. Congress won’t take its power back. The members literally go to the Administration and beg them to write regulations so they don’t have to take votes.

    I don’t think that’s true – The Executive Branch can’t force the Congress to do anything.

    Yes he can. Here it is:

     

    All Regulations of the Executive Branch not explicitly written into statute by Congress are hereby rescinded.

    Done

    You’ve never heard of the Administrative Procedures Act, have you?

    This is an order by the only person empowered by the Constitution in the executive. 

    The President can, under his powers of office, suspend regulations written in his name. Period. 

    • #219
  10. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    I would have expected nothing less. The judiciary–a supposedly co-equal branch of government (please correct this foreigner if She is wrong about that)–is about to discover what it’s like to be subjected to, and torn apart by, the whims of political hacks up to and including the one occupying the Oval Office, and by their mind-numbed robots among the media, the glitterati, and the Twitterati.

    I learned from a Constitution podcast that the thought the branches are co-equal is incorrect. Congress has more power. For example, they have the ability to fire the other two branches, through impeachment. Neither of the other two branches can remove a member of Congress. The hosts claimed that the thought the branches are co-equal was started by the Nixon administration.

    Congress just won’t use its power and gives it all away.

    Going a bit far afield here, but I’ve said several times on various threads here on Ricochet, the fundamental problem that the American government is suffering from for the last 20-plus years is that we have a Legislative branch that refuses to Legislate. We haven’t had a budget since the Clinton Administration, and what legislation they do pass tends to be stuff along the lines of “The Secretary of <department> shall issue regulation to <whatever>.”

    Fix that problem, and you resolve a lot of issues of governance.

    My personal preference would be a Constitutional Amendment such that no executive branch regulation can take effect without a positive affirmative vote of the Congress. Make Congresscritters accountable for what the government is doing.

     

     

    A President could do this with an executive order. Congress won’t take its power back. The members literally go to the Administration and beg them to write regulations so they don’t have to take votes.

    I don’t think that’s true – The Executive Branch can’t force the Congress to do anything.

    Yes he can. Here it is:

     

    All Regulations of the Executive Branch not explicitly written into statute by Congress are hereby rescinded.

    Done

    You’ve never heard of the Administrative Procedures Act, have you?

    This is an order by the only person empowered by the Constitution in the executive.

    The President can, under his powers of office, suspend regulations written in his name. Period.

    No, not at all.  

    • #220
  11. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    I would have expected nothing less. The judiciary–a supposedly co-equal branch of government (please correct this foreigner if She is wrong about that)–is about to discover what it’s like to be subjected to, and torn apart by, the whims of political hacks up to and including the one occupying the Oval Office, and by their mind-numbed robots among the media, the glitterati, and the Twitterati.

    I learned from a Constitution podcast that the thought the branches are co-equal is incorrect. Congress has more power. For example, they have the ability to fire the other two branches, through impeachment. Neither of the other two branches can remove a member of Congress. The hosts claimed that the thought the branches are co-equal was started by the Nixon administration.

    Congress just won’t use its power and gives it all away.

    Going a bit far afield here, but I’ve said several times on various threads here on Ricochet, the fundamental problem that the American government is suffering from for the last 20-plus years is that we have a Legislative branch that refuses to Legislate. We haven’t had a budget since the Clinton Administration, and what legislation they do pass tends to be stuff along the lines of “The Secretary of <department> shall issue regulation to <whatever>.”

    Fix that problem, and you resolve a lot of issues of governance.

    My personal preference would be a Constitutional Amendment such that no executive branch regulation can take effect without a positive affirmative vote of the Congress. Make Congresscritters accountable for what the government is doing.

     

     

    A President could do this with an executive order. Congress won’t take its power back. The members literally go to the Administration and beg them to write regulations so they don’t have to take votes.

    I don’t think that’s true – The Executive Branch can’t force the Congress to do anything.

    Yes he can. Here it is:

     

    All Regulations of the Executive Branch not explicitly written into statute by Congress are hereby rescinded.

    Done

    You’ve never heard of the Administrative Procedures Act, have you?

    This is an order by the only person empowered by the Constitution in the executive.

    The President can, under his powers of office, suspend regulations written in his name. Period.

    No, not at all.

    Yeah, that worked so well for Trump, didn’t it?

    • #221
  12. navyjag Coolidge
    navyjag
    @navyjag

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    I would have expected nothing less. The judiciary–a supposedly co-equal branch of government (please correct this foreigner if She is wrong about that)–is about to discover what it’s like to be subjected to, and torn apart by, the whims of political hacks up to and including the one occupying the Oval Office, and by their mind-numbed robots among the media, the glitterati, and the Twitterati.

    I learned from a Constitution podcast that the thought the branches are co-equal is incorrect. Congress has more power. For example, they have the ability to fire the other two branches, through impeachment. Neither of the other two branches can remove a member of Congress. The hosts claimed that the thought the branches are co-equal was started by the Nixon administration.

    Congress just won’t use its power and gives it all away.

    Going a bit far afield here, but I’ve said several times on various threads here on Ricochet, the fundamental problem that the American government is suffering from for the last 20-plus years is that we have a Legislative branch that refuses to Legislate. We haven’t had a budget since the Clinton Administration, and what legislation they do pass tends to be stuff along the lines of “The Secretary of <department> shall issue regulation to <whatever>.”

    Fix that problem, and you resolve a lot of issues of governance.

    My personal preference would be a Constitutional Amendment such that no executive branch regulation can take effect without a positive affirmative vote of the Congress. Make Congresscritters accountable for what the government is doing.

     

     

    A President could do this with an executive order. Congress won’t take its power back. The members literally go to the Administration and beg them to write regulations so they don’t have to take votes.

    I don’t think that’s true – The Executive Branch can’t force the Congress to do anything.

    Yes he can. Hereit is:

     

    All Regulations of the Executive Branch not explicitly written into statute by Congress are hereby rescinded.

    Done

    You’ve never heard of the Administrative Procedures Act, have you?

    This is an order by the only person empowered by the Constitution in the executive.

    The President can, under his powers of office, suspend regulations written in his name. Period.

    No, not at all.

    Yeah, that worked so well for Trump, didn’t it?

    KE, other than the tax cuts and Supreme Court nominees, cutting back the regs was one of his best accomplishments.  Only a few million to go.  Maybe 10 million after Biden. 

    • #222
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    navyjag (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    I would have expected nothing less. The judiciary–a supposedly co-equal branch of government (please correct this foreigner if She is wrong about that)–is about to discover what it’s like to be subjected to, and torn apart by, the whims of political hacks up to and including the one occupying the Oval Office, and by their mind-numbed robots among the media, the glitterati, and the Twitterati.

    I learned from a Constitution podcast that the thought the branches are co-equal is incorrect. Congress has more power. For example, they have the ability to fire the other two branches, through impeachment. Neither of the other two branches can remove a member of Congress. The hosts claimed that the thought the branches are co-equal was started by the Nixon administration.

    Congress just won’t use its power and gives it all away.

    Going a bit far afield here, but I’ve said several times on various threads here on Ricochet, the fundamental problem that the American government is suffering from for the last 20-plus years is that we have a Legislative branch that refuses to Legislate. We haven’t had a budget since the Clinton Administration, and what legislation they do pass tends to be stuff along the lines of “The Secretary of <department> shall issue regulation to <whatever>.”

    Fix that problem, and you resolve a lot of issues of governance.

    My personal preference would be a Constitutional Amendment such that no executive branch regulation can take effect without a positive affirmative vote of the Congress. Make Congresscritters accountable for what the government is doing.

     

     

    A President could do this with an executive order. Congress won’t take its power back. The members literally go to the Administration and beg them to write regulations so they don’t have to take votes.

    I don’t think that’s true – The Executive Branch can’t force the Congress to do anything.

    Yes he can. Hereit is:

     

    All Regulations of the Executive Branch not explicitly written into statute by Congress are hereby rescinded.

    Done

    You’ve never heard of the Administrative Procedures Act, have you?

    This is an order by the only person empowered by the Constitution in the executive.

    The President can, under his powers of office, suspend regulations written in his name. Period.

    No, not at all.

    Yeah, that worked so well for Trump, didn’t it?

    KE, other than the tax cuts and Supreme Court nominees, cutting back the regs was one of his best accomplishments. Only a few million to go. Maybe 10 million after Biden.

    But what I meant was, when Trump tried to undo Obama’s executive orders, courts said “no.”

    • #223
  14. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    EHerring (View Comment):
    The coat hanger threat was effective. Rather than succumb to it, maybe it is time to coldly respond that anyone who would do that deserves all the medical complications that will ensue, including sepsis and their own death. I have been treated so rudely over the years by these baby killers that I am done with them, we need to streamline adoptions and support pregnant young  girls to deter this evil.

    Why do they think any woman today would be dumb enough to try a coat hanger, when they can buy abortion pills online or take a cheap Southwest flight to the nearest blue state?  Seems like an insult to the intelligence of modern women.

    • #224
  15. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    EHerring (View Comment):
    The coat hanger threat was effective. Rather than succumb to it, maybe it is time to coldly respond that anyone who would do that deserves all the medical complications that will ensue, including sepsis and their own death. I have been treated so rudely over the years by these baby killers that I am done with them, we need to streamline adoptions and support pregnant young girls to deter this evil.

    Why do they think any woman today would be dumb enough to try a coat hanger, when they can buy abortion pills online or take a cheap Southwest flight to the nearest blue state? Seems like an insult to the intelligence of modern women.

    What if they can’t afford even a cheap flight, but they have a coat hanger in the closet?  It’s all about “poverty” and stuff, y’know.

    • #225
  16. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    EHerring (View Comment):
    The coat hanger threat was effective. Rather than succumb to it, maybe it is time to coldly respond that anyone who would do that deserves all the medical complications that will ensue, including sepsis and their own death. I have been treated so rudely over the years by these baby killers that I am done with them, we need to streamline adoptions and support pregnant young girls to deter this evil.

    Why do they think any woman today would be dumb enough to try a coat hanger, when they can buy abortion pills online or take a cheap Southwest flight to the nearest blue state? Seems like an insult to the intelligence of modern women.

    What if they can’t afford even a cheap flight, but they have a coat hanger in the closet? It’s all about “poverty” and stuff, y’know.

    If they can’t even afford a cheap flight, how are they going to afford a trip to Planned Parenthood?  They turn quite a profit on killing babies.

    • #226
  17. navyjag Coolidge
    navyjag
    @navyjag

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    EHerring (View Comment):
    The coat hanger threat was effective. Rather than succumb to it, maybe it is time to coldly respond that anyone who would do that deserves all the medical complications that will ensue, including sepsis and their own death. I have been treated so rudely over the years by these baby killers that I am done with them, we need to streamline adoptions and support pregnant young girls to deter this evil.

    Why do they think any woman today would be dumb enough to try a coat hanger, when they can buy abortion pills online or take a cheap Southwest flight to the nearest blue state? Seems like an insult to the intelligence of modern women.

    What if they can’t afford even a cheap flight, but they have a coat hanger in the closet? It’s all about “poverty” and stuff, y’know.

    Then come to California.  Gov. French Laundry has enough of our taxes in his bank account to offer the chicks $4K for their experience.  Might wind up at the Mark Hopkins.  Right by the cable cars. 

    • #227
  18. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    I would have expected nothing less. The judiciary–a supposedly co-equal branch of government (please correct this foreigner if She is wrong about that)–is about to discover what it’s like to be subjected to, and torn apart by, the whims of political hacks up to and including the one occupying the Oval Office, and by their mind-numbed robots among the media, the glitterati, and the Twitterati.

    I learned from a Constitution podcast that the thought the branches are co-equal is incorrect. Congress has more power. For example, they have the ability to fire the other two branches, through impeachment. Neither of the other two branches can remove a member of Congress. The hosts claimed that the thought the branches are co-equal was started by the Nixon administration.

    Congress just won’t use its power and gives it all away.

    Going a bit far afield here, but I’ve said several times on various threads here on Ricochet, the fundamental problem that the American government is suffering from for the last 20-plus years is that we have a Legislative branch that refuses to Legislate. We haven’t had a budget since the Clinton Administration, and what legislation they do pass tends to be stuff along the lines of “The Secretary of <department> shall issue regulation to <whatever>.”

    Fix that problem, and you resolve a lot of issues of governance.

    My personal preference would be a Constitutional Amendment such that no executive branch regulation can take effect without a positive affirmative vote of the Congress. Make Congresscritters accountable for what the government is doing.

     

     

    A President could do this with an executive order. Congress won’t take its power back. The members literally go to the Administration and beg them to write regulations so they don’t have to take votes.

    I don’t think that’s true – The Executive Branch can’t force the Congress to do anything.

    Yes he can. Here it is:

     

    All Regulations of the Executive Branch not explicitly written into statute by Congress are hereby rescinded.

    Done

    You’ve never heard of the Administrative Procedures Act, have you?

    This is an order by the only person empowered by the Constitution in the executive.

    The President can, under his powers of office, suspend regulations written in his name. Period.

    The Administrative Procedures Act is a law, passed by Congress and signed by the President, that says otherwise.  There is a legal process that must be gone through to implement/change/eliminate regulations by Executive Agencies.  

    • #228
  19. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    kedavis (View Comment):

    navyjag (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Bishop Wash (View Comment):

    She (View Comment):
    I would have expected nothing less. The judiciary–a supposedly co-equal branch of government (please correct this foreigner if She is wrong about that)–is about to discover what it’s like to be subjected to, and torn apart by, the whims of political hacks up to and including the one occupying the Oval Office, and by their mind-numbed robots among the media, the glitterati, and the Twitterati.

    I learned from a Constitution podcast that the thought the branches are co-equal is incorrect. Congress has more power. For example, they have the ability to fire the other two branches, through impeachment. Neither of the other two branches can remove a member of Congress. The hosts claimed that the thought the branches are co-equal was started by the Nixon administration.

    Congress just won’t use its power and gives it all away.

    Going a bit far afield here, but I’ve said several times on various threads here on Ricochet, the fundamental problem that the American government is suffering from for the last 20-plus years is that we have a Legislative branch that refuses to Legislate. We haven’t had a budget since the Clinton Administration, and what legislation they do pass tends to be stuff along the lines of “The Secretary of <department> shall issue regulation to <whatever>.”

    Fix that problem, and you resolve a lot of issues of governance.

    My personal preference would be a Constitutional Amendment such that no executive branch regulation can take effect without a positive affirmative vote of the Congress. Make Congresscritters accountable for what the government is doing.

     

     

    A President could do this with an executive order. Congress won’t take its power back. The members literally go to the Administration and beg them to write regulations so they don’t have to take votes.

    I don’t think that’s true – The Executive Branch can’t force the Congress to do anything.

    Yes he can. Hereit is:

     

    All Regulations of the Executive Branch not explicitly written into statute by Congress are hereby rescinded.

    Done

    You’ve never heard of the Administrative Procedures Act, have you?

    This is an order by the only person empowered by the Constitution in the executive.

    The President can, under his powers of office, suspend regulations written in his name. Period.

    No, not at all.

    Yeah, that worked so well for Trump, didn’t it?

    KE, other than the tax cuts and Supreme Court nominees, cutting back the regs was one of his best accomplishments. Only a few million to go. Maybe 10 million after Biden.

    But what I meant was, when Trump tried to undo Obama’s executive orders, courts said “no.”

    Ignore the courts and move on. 

    What are they going to do, Impeach him? Oh wait…

    • #229
  20. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Seriously, the Problem with the Administrative state is that Congress has given away its power to legislate to the Executive. The Executive can reject it. 

    It is amazing to me that you so -called conservatives are siding with the progressives on this. 

    The President can send everyone home. Oh sure, they might still get paid, but no one can force the President to execute administrative law. It cannot be done. The President can suspend all operations he wants. No court order can “turn those machines” back on. 

    • #230
  21. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Seriously, the Problem with the Administrative state is that Congress has given away its power to legislate to the Executive. The Executive can reject it.

    It is amazing to me that you so -called conservatives are siding with the progressives on this.

    The President can send everyone home. Oh sure, they might still get paid, but no one can force the President to execute administrative law. It cannot be done. The President can suspend all operations he wants. No court order can “turn those machines” back on.

    Not siding with anyone on this. That’s just the current state of the law.  The APA gives agencies certain rule making and judicial power and once something is put in place there are specific procedures before those rules can be changed or undone.

    • #231
  22. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Seriously, the Problem with the Administrative state is that Congress has given away its power to legislate to the Executive. The Executive can reject it.

    It is amazing to me that you so -called conservatives are siding with the progressives on this.

    The President can send everyone home. Oh sure, they might still get paid, but no one can force the President to execute administrative law. It cannot be done. The President can suspend all operations he wants. No court order can “turn those machines” back on.

    Not siding with anyone on this. That’s just the current state of the law. The APA gives agencies certain rule making and judicial power and once something is put in place there are specific procedures before those rules can be changed or undone.

    It does not matter. The President can send all of them home and suspend the regulations. Nothing anyone can do can stop him from doing that. No Court order. Nothing. 

    I am not quite sure why you think this is not the case. I’d like you to explain to me how the APA can be enforced when the Chief Law Enforcement Officer declares it unconstitutional (which it is) and acts accordingly. The only Check is Impeachment and Removal from office. No party controls, or is likely to control, 2/3 of the Senate, and Impeachment has now turned into a tool of political theater anyway. Every President from now on will be impeached when his party loses the House. 

     

    • #232
  23. Amy Schley, Longcat Shrinker Moderator
    Amy Schley, Longcat Shrinker
    @AmySchley

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    EHerring (View Comment):
    The coat hanger threat was effective. Rather than succumb to it, maybe it is time to coldly respond that anyone who would do that deserves all the medical complications that will ensue, including sepsis and their own death. I have been treated so rudely over the years by these baby killers that I am done with them, we need to streamline adoptions and support pregnant young girls to deter this evil.

    Why do they think any woman today would be dumb enough to try a coat hanger, when they can buy abortion pills online or take a cheap Southwest flight to the nearest blue state? Seems like an insult to the intelligence of modern women.

    Why would any woman today need an abortion when they can buy birth control pills online or get an implant that’s good for a decade? 

    I don’t disagree with the more “eugenicy” pro-abortion folks that women who get abortions aren’t capable of being parents. To need an abortion in this day and age without rape being involved, the woman in question has to be an idiot who can’t take basic precautions and/ or tell her lover no. Women who can’t figure out condoms won’t figure out diapers, and women who can’t say no to a lover won’t say no to a toddler, either. 

    • #233
  24. DrewInWisconsin, Oik! Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    If they can’t even afford a cheap flight, how are they going to afford a trip to Planned Parenthood? They turn quite a profit on killing babies.

    There will be plenty of Democrat politicians ready to fund abortions the same way they fund bail money for burn-loot-murder. Kamala might even help out.

    • #234
  25. No Caesar Thatcher
    No Caesar
    @NoCaesar

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    No Caesar (View Comment):
    I agree with those who say this leak will dramatically harm the Court going forward. When they are found out, and they will be, they must be severely punished, no matter who they are.

    The response to the leak by the Dems in Congress will be more harmful than this leak. Punished for violating what law?

    I was surprised by the vitriol and hate spewed forth by Speaker Pelosi and Senate Leader Schumer against Supreme Court Justices. Pelosi and Schumer have both said intemperate things in the past, but this is a new level of hate, and if it is an indication of how Democrats are going to respond, then we are in for a period of even greater harm from hate and division than even their irrational responses to Trump were.

    Classic signs of Alzheimers and Dementia.  The Democrats (and our government) are being run by Draculas.

    • #235
  26. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    EHerring (View Comment):
    The coat hanger threat was effective. Rather than succumb to it, maybe it is time to coldly respond that anyone who would do that deserves all the medical complications that will ensue, including sepsis and their own death. I have been treated so rudely over the years by these baby killers that I am done with them, we need to streamline adoptions and support pregnant young girls to deter this evil.

    Why do they think any woman today would be dumb enough to try a coat hanger, when they can buy abortion pills online or take a cheap Southwest flight to the nearest blue state? Seems like an insult to the intelligence of modern women.

    Seems like an insult to the intelligence of modern women.

    Well, it is accurate for many women.

    • #236
  27. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Would seem the arguments the left are making have collateral damage by touting failures of planned parenthood. One argument is abortion is needed they say is because the poor have such bad prenatal health care and so many failed pregnancies.

    • #237
  28. Skyler Coolidge
    Skyler
    @Skyler

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Seriously, the Problem with the Administrative state is that Congress has given away its power to legislate to the Executive. The Executive can reject it.

    It is amazing to me that you so -called conservatives are siding with the progressives on this.

    The President can send everyone home. Oh sure, they might still get paid, but no one can force the President to execute administrative law. It cannot be done. The President can suspend all operations he wants. No court order can “turn those machines” back on.

    Not siding with anyone on this. That’s just the current state of the law. The APA gives agencies certain rule making and judicial power and once something is put in place there are specific procedures before those rules can be changed or undone.

    It does not matter. The President can send all of them home and suspend the regulations. Nothing anyone can do can stop him from doing that. No Court order. Nothing.

    I am not quite sure why you think this is not the case. I’d like you to explain to me how the APA can be enforced when the Chief Law Enforcement Officer declares it unconstitutional (which it is) and acts accordingly. The only Check is Impeachment and Removal from office. No party controls, or is likely to control, 2/3 of the Senate, and Impeachment has now turned into a tool of political theater anyway. Every President from now on will be impeached when his party loses the House.

     

    Well, if you want to make things up, then sure, it’s fine.  If you want to include martians and fairy dust, your opinion will work just great.  However, the Supreme Court has ruled on the APA many times, often reluctantly, and has agreed that the APA is constitutional.  The president can’t do what you say.  There are procedures.  If the president does what you say he might get away with it, but it would certainly be illegal.

    • #238
  29. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Skyler (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Seriously, the Problem with the Administrative state is that Congress has given away its power to legislate to the Executive. The Executive can reject it.

    It is amazing to me that you so -called conservatives are siding with the progressives on this.

    The President can send everyone home. Oh sure, they might still get paid, but no one can force the President to execute administrative law. It cannot be done. The President can suspend all operations he wants. No court order can “turn those machines” back on.

    Not siding with anyone on this. That’s just the current state of the law. The APA gives agencies certain rule making and judicial power and once something is put in place there are specific procedures before those rules can be changed or undone.

    It does not matter. The President can send all of them home and suspend the regulations. Nothing anyone can do can stop him from doing that. No Court order. Nothing.

    I am not quite sure why you think this is not the case. I’d like you to explain to me how the APA can be enforced when the Chief Law Enforcement Officer declares it unconstitutional (which it is) and acts accordingly. The only Check is Impeachment and Removal from office. No party controls, or is likely to control, 2/3 of the Senate, and Impeachment has now turned into a tool of political theater anyway. Every President from now on will be impeached when his party loses the House.

     

    Well, if you want to make things up, then sure, it’s fine. If you want to include martians and fairy dust, your opinion will work just great. However, the Supreme Court has ruled on the APA many times, often reluctantly, and has agreed that the APA is constitutional. The president can’t do what you say. There are procedures. If the president does what you say he might get away with it, but it would certainly be illegal.

    No it would not.

    It would be his interpretation of the US Constitution. 

    No where can anyone point to that document that stops him. It is not fantasy to follow the text.  No branch of government has the power to set up an unaccountable Legislature.

    • #239
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.