High Court doing its job
Robert Curran’s recent column demonstrates the ignorance of the left when it comes to the Constitution. Unlike the political branches of our government, the executive and the legislative, the Supreme Court does not deal in personality politics. Its constitutional role is to interpret the law as written, not as the elitist liberal establishment would like it to be.
As Chief Justice John Roberts noted, the president was exercising legitimate executive power to regulate the borders of this country. It had nothing to do with perceived personal animus toward any group.
The left ignores the fact that the list of countries covered by the ban was developed during the Obama administration by our intelligence agencies and that it included two non-Muslim-majority nations.
Rather than castigate Sen. Mitch McConnell, citizens should be thankful that we have a court that doesn’t attempt to legislate from the bench, but recognizes its true constitutional role.
David L. Patton
Trump could renew court
The liberal socialists, who’ve hijacked the Democratic Party and now clamor about the upcoming appointment of a new Supreme Court justice, show amazing shortsightedness in their hostility toward President Donald Trump’s choices.
They are worried about one appointment while this president might get several before he leaves the White House. He’s working on his second appointment, with several more coming down the line.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer are all candidates to leave the court over the next six years, and with that America will have an opportunity of returning to a conservative court for the first time in decades.
If Trump can make those appointments, the court would indeed return to its original intent with rulings for limited government, strict constitutional interpretation and less judicial activism.
The founding fathers would be happy with a return to limited government, greater liberty and the pursuit of happiness for legal citizens.