I think we need to sharpen our legal pencils and use the law to repeal everything that’s beyond the 10th amendment.
5 replies on “The Lawfare Approach Is Moving Forward”
I am thinking that first a blunter form of Lawfare has to happen.
The Left has never had any problem going to the courts over any damned thing. They knew then, and still have cause to know now that the courts not only are sympathetic to them,
… but enjoy being Appointed Kings & Queens over often too compliant Legislatures, Presidents, both Republican and (generally reflexively because they were getting what they wanted anyway) Democrats.
The Left has known that Conservative judges have confused Conservative with Compliant and still do for some time.
So first the Courts have to be persuaded, ever so gently, to not want that power, to not yield to that flattery.
Start by Conservatives starting to go to court over anything and everything, just making certain that it is not always the same lawyers or the same plaintiffs doing the filing.
The courts can punish you for being a nuisance. They WILL consider Conservatives nuisances for doing what the left has done all along, and punish them harshly for it.
Make certain the funding for these lawsuits is solid enough but comes from a wide enough range to be the cockroaches in the judges’ kitchen … never fully eliminated, always coming back, never sending a polite note when they are.
So you’ve increased the work load.
Then always, or as often as you can, block any opening on the bench from being filled. Never mind the Hoover Foundation’s Wish List. We wish we had never heard of 3 of those judges on that list.
DO NOT REPLACE DEAD OR RETIRING FEDERAL JUDGES, or even state judges.
You’ve made more work for them, now make sure that EVERY YEAR THERE ARE FEWER AND FEWER JUDGES TO DO THE WORK.
Lastly, get into those state legislatures. Fix the voter laws.
BUT EVERY TIME YOU GET A CHANCE KEEP THE BUDGET FOR THE COURT FROZEN.
Cutting those budgets is a goal. But just freeing them will make it more and more expensive to run the courts.
Because INFLATION!
And the fewer and fewer judges are working harder and harder. Because the nuisance lawsuits do not stop, they increase.
Watch how Friar Tuck deals with this corrupt Bishop.
And if anyone thinks that this isn’t a conservative viewpoint.. well it’s practically Biblical: The Widow and the Unjust Judge (Luke 18:1-8)
Now that’s what you call precedent.
“Then always, or as often as you can, block any opening on the bench from being filled. Never mind the Hoover Foundation’s Wish List. We wish we had never heard of 3 of those judges on that list.
DO NOT REPLACE DEAD OR RETIRING FEDERAL JUDGES, or even state judges.
How? Please educate me.
They are nominated, and have to be approved by the Senate.
And other legislative bodies.
There are still ways to even stop the nominations from getting to a vote. The Democrats blocked a hundred or so that Trump had to fill in.
Just keep blocking them.
I’ll have to look up the majority needed to repeal. If 2/3 of states are needed to enact, I’d think it’s something like that. Worth looking into. 🙂
5 replies on “The Lawfare Approach Is Moving Forward”
I am thinking that first a blunter form of Lawfare has to happen.
The Left has never had any problem going to the courts over any damned thing. They knew then, and still have cause to know now that the courts not only are sympathetic to them,
… but enjoy being Appointed Kings & Queens over often too compliant Legislatures, Presidents, both Republican and (generally reflexively because they were getting what they wanted anyway) Democrats.
The Left has known that Conservative judges have confused Conservative with Compliant and still do for some time.
So first the Courts have to be persuaded, ever so gently, to not want that power, to not yield to that flattery.
Start by Conservatives starting to go to court over anything and everything, just making certain that it is not always the same lawyers or the same plaintiffs doing the filing.
The courts can punish you for being a nuisance. They WILL consider Conservatives nuisances for doing what the left has done all along, and punish them harshly for it.
Make certain the funding for these lawsuits is solid enough but comes from a wide enough range to be the cockroaches in the judges’ kitchen … never fully eliminated, always coming back, never sending a polite note when they are.
So you’ve increased the work load.
Then always, or as often as you can, block any opening on the bench from being filled. Never mind the Hoover Foundation’s Wish List. We wish we had never heard of 3 of those judges on that list.
DO NOT REPLACE DEAD OR RETIRING FEDERAL JUDGES, or even state judges.
You’ve made more work for them, now make sure that EVERY YEAR THERE ARE FEWER AND FEWER JUDGES TO DO THE WORK.
Lastly, get into those state legislatures. Fix the voter laws.
BUT EVERY TIME YOU GET A CHANCE KEEP THE BUDGET FOR THE COURT FROZEN.
Cutting those budgets is a goal. But just freeing them will make it more and more expensive to run the courts.
Because INFLATION!
And the fewer and fewer judges are working harder and harder. Because the nuisance lawsuits do not stop, they increase.
Watch how Friar Tuck deals with this corrupt Bishop.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_fhfRODOmc
Exactly this. You need to grind them down.
And if anyone thinks that this isn’t a conservative viewpoint.. well it’s practically Biblical: The Widow and the Unjust Judge (Luke 18:1-8)
Now that’s what you call precedent.
“Then always, or as often as you can, block any opening on the bench from being filled. Never mind the Hoover Foundation’s Wish List. We wish we had never heard of 3 of those judges on that list.
DO NOT REPLACE DEAD OR RETIRING FEDERAL JUDGES, or even state judges.
How? Please educate me.
They are nominated, and have to be approved by the Senate.
And other legislative bodies.
There are still ways to even stop the nominations from getting to a vote. The Democrats blocked a hundred or so that Trump had to fill in.
Just keep blocking them.
I’ll have to look up the majority needed to repeal. If 2/3 of states are needed to enact, I’d think it’s something like that. Worth looking into. 🙂