The Supreme Court just got some really bad news about its next Justice

The 2020 election will determine the shape of the Supreme Court for the next generation.

And any new Supreme Court nominees could reconfigure American life.

But the Supreme Court just got some really bad news about its next Justice.

Donald Trump won the 2016 election in part on his promise to appoint conservative Supreme Court justices.

The President made good on that pledge by nominating Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh to the bench.

But in a campaign swing through South Carolina, former Vice President Joe Biden falsely attacked President Trump’s judicial picks for not following the traditional reading of the Constitution.

Breitbart reports:

Former vice president Joe Biden told a town hall meeting Thursday evening that President Donald Trump’s judicial appointees have “no interest whatsoever in the traditional reading of the Constitution.”

He then caught himself and said: “I shouldn’t say ‘whatsoever.’ Don’t add that in there.”

Trump has prided himself on nominating constitutional originalists, who interpret the Constitution and the law through the original text as understood when written. Biden favors a “living Constitution” approach that interprets the Constitution and the law through a “penumbra” of rights beyond those actually provided in the text.

That was an insane comment by Biden.

Liberals like Biden are the ones that believe the Constitution is a “living” document that allows Justices to change its meaning as they see fit.

The idea of a living Constitution is how liberal justices imposed abortion and homosexual marriage on America.

And with this campaign appearance, Biden is promising to appoint Left-wing Supreme Court justices who will ignore what the Constitution says and eliminate the Second Amendment, suppress religious liberty, and gut free speech.

You may also like...

90 Responses

  1. jreb57 says:

    What good is a constitution that can be changed at the whim of the justices? Their job is to interpret laws in the light of the constitution, not to change the meaning. Should it become necessary to make changes, there are two ways that this might happen and they both involve more than 9 people.

  2. carl says:

    please get back on your meds

  3. Romojo says:

    Vasi—you again?! Too many words; too little truth. Your comments have too much of the first and too little of the second.

  4. Dale says:

    I didn’t mean to sound that bad.

  5. Highplainsdrifter says:

    Spank, where or who told you all this. I am a avid reader, and love the truth. If you want me to believe you, show me. Anybody can say anything about anybody. Doesn’t mean it’s true. So, show me the facts. I would appreciate it.

  6. Charles Harris says:

    OK. Now you can go back to CNN or to sleep.

  7. Kara Wright says:

    I fully agree with you.

  8. Rick says:

    Sorry, can you try saying this again in English? Can’t understand a word you’re saying.

  9. Vince says:

    NO WAY you have a grasp on reality. NOAA deals with weather. All ready, allready and already. Well, 1 out of 3 is correct. (I used the word correct because you definitely aren’t Right) BTW judges should strictly interpret law whether they agree with it or not. Congress makes or changes laws. 3 separate but equal branches.

  10. tracker says:

    As President Reagan once said: “The problem with our liberal friends is that they ‘know’ so much that just isn’t true”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: