•   
  •   
  •   

Politics AOC just revealed her dangerous constitutional illiteracy

15:05  17 april  2021
15:05  17 april  2021 Source:   washingtonexaminer.com

Consorts, past and future, in Britain’s changing monarchy

  Consorts, past and future, in Britain’s changing monarchy LONDON (AP) — Prince Philip was the longest serving royal consort in British history by more than a decade when he died Friday at 99. It was a role he assumed in 1952 when his wife, Queen Elizabeth II, ascended to the throne after the sudden death of her father King George VI. In Britain, the husband or wife of the monarch is known as the consort, a position that carries immense prestige but has no constitutional role. Here are some of the other royal consorts, past and future.QUEEN ELIZABETH, THE QUEEN MOTHERThe mother of the current queen came to be known affectionately in Britain as The Queen Mum.

Like every new member of Congress, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez pledged to uphold the Constitution when she was sworn into office. But the socialist congresswoman’s latest criticism of the Supreme Court reveals that she lacks even the most basic understanding of the document she promised to protect.

a woman looking at a laptop © Provided by Washington Examiner

Ocasio-Cortez weighed in on the latest proposal from several prominent Democrats in Congress to “pack” the Supreme Court by adding four new Democrat-selected justices to the bench to skew its ideological balance in their party’s favor. This proposal is disastrous and dangerous in and of itself. Yet, the congresswoman not only endorsed the plan to turn the Supreme Court into a rubber stamp but essentially suggested that she doesn’t believe the high court should act as a check on Congress at all.

Here's How Fox News and Trump Ended Up on Flip Sides of the Free Speech Fight

  Here's How Fox News and Trump Ended Up on Flip Sides of the Free Speech Fight After letting its hosts make wildly false claims about how Donald Trump’s political opponents supposedly “stole” the election from him, Fox News is facing potentially catastrophic lawsuits seeking billions in damages from election systems companies Dominion and Smartmatic. That’s why the former president’s personal propaganda network is now trying to raise the shield of legal protections for the press that Trump has spent years smashing. "I'mThat’s why the former president’s personal propaganda network is now trying to raise the shield of legal protections for the press that Trump has spent years smashing.

According to Fox News, Ocasio-Cortez questioned why the justices "can overturn laws that hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocates, and policymakers drew consensus on."

“How much does the current structure benefit us?" she asked. “I don't think it does."

With these remarks, the congresswoman misunderstands or rejects the very role the Supreme Court plays in safeguarding our constitutional liberties. She decries the fact that the judiciary can overrule elected policymakers, but that’s exactly the point. The reason we have a First Amendment, for example, is because our right to freedom of speech is supposed to be off-limits — yes, even for “laws that hundreds and thousands of legislators, advocates, and policymakers drew consensus on.”

Report: Berlin Constitutional Protection Monitored Corona Protest Movement

 Report: Berlin Constitutional Protection Monitored Corona Protest Movement The Berlin constitutional protection has provided a report with parts of the Corona protest movement under observation. These would now be led by the state authority as a suspected event, the ARD capital studio reported on Wednesday, citing security circuits. According to the constitution protection, there are "sufficiently important indications" for the protest movement to pursue partly constitutional aspirations.

In fact, the Supreme Court’s history is littered with examples in which laws enacted by democratic majorities were struck down by judges in robes to protect our freedoms. Here are just a few:

  • In the 1954 case Brown v. Board of Education, the court ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, even if enacted through the democratic process.
  • In the 1989 case Texas v. Johnson, the court ruled that even if a majority of voters want to ban flag-burning, doing so is an unconstitutional restriction on the freedom of speech.
  • In the 2003 case Lawrence v. Texas, the court ruled that states cannot criminalize consensual sex between adults of the same gender, even if many voters and politicians wanted to, as doing so violates fundamental liberties.

Studying all the cases in which the Supreme Court has served this important anti-democratic role to protect our freedom would take years. Ocasio-Cortez’s comments suggest that she thinks majoritarian support alone should be the criteria for a public policy’s legality. The congresswoman ought to reflect on this given the fact that such horrors as slavery, segregation, and the denial of women’s suffrage all once commanded huge majorities of public support.

Marjorie Taylor Greene wants to debate Green New Deal with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

  Marjorie Taylor Greene wants to debate Green New Deal with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) challenged Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to a debate about the Green New Deal in a series of tweets on Wednesday.".@AOC I'd like to challenge you to a debate on the Green New Deal economic policy," Greene tweeted..@AOC I'd like to challenge you to a debate on the Green New Deal economic policy. Since you sponsored the Green New Deal and have a degree in Economics, I'm sure you are more than".@AOC I'd like to challenge you to a debate on the Green New Deal economic policy," Greene tweeted.

The very point of our Constitution is to establish between the different branches of our government a system of checks and balances, so they keep each other from overreaching and violating our rights. By striking down laws that go beyond the Constitution’s bounds, the Supreme Court plays a vital role in keeping Congress in check. Politicians can still pursue the mandate voters have given them; they may simply have to rewrite legislation or pursue alternate paths to comply with the Constitution.

That Ocasio-Cortez seemingly thinks the Supreme Court should rubber-stamp anything she and her colleagues pass with majoritarian “consensus” reveals a woeful misunderstanding of or utter disdain for the Constitution she’s sworn to protect.

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a Washington Examiner contributor and host of the Breaking Boundaries podcast.

Tags: Opinion, Beltway Confidential, Blog Contributors, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Supreme Court, Constitution, Congress, Legislative Branch, Judicial Branch

Original Author: Brad Polumbo

Original Location: AOC just revealed her dangerous constitutional illiteracy

AOC keeps her cool as Rep. Greene blasts Green New Deal as ‘communists manifesto’ .
The progressive lawmaker doesn’t seem to want any part of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s demand for a debate on the merits of the Green New Deal.AOC doesn’t seem to want any part of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s demand for a knockdown, drag-out debate over the Green New Deal.

usr: 0
This is interesting!