Are Trump’s SCOTUS nominees as conservative as they portray themselves?
Americans are sitting on the edge of their seat, putting all of their hopes in the possibility that President Trump will not only pull through and win the election, but finally drain the swamp in light of all the obvious election fraud. The election fraud that is so blatantly obvious I might add, it is almost like they wanted you to see it. One of the possible saving graces in the minds of conservatives, if this fiasco should end up in the Supreme Court, is the recent confirmation of Justice Amy Barrett. Many people believe that she will be the deciding factor in any election fraud case that swings the results in the Donald’s favor. This may well be however, there is another recent confirmation of a Trump appointee who people put a lot of faith in that turned out to be nothing that he seemed.
Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, according to The Daily Signal, stated while hearing Texas v. California, another court challenge to the individual mandate in Obamacare, that if the mandate is struck down, the rest of law should stand. Many people will be shocked by this because they are under the illusion that every SCOTUS pick by President Trump is a strict constitutionalist. This is far from the truth. Especially when it comes to Brett Kavanagh. During the confirmation process, where the Democrats staged a show accusing Kavanaugh of being a sexual predator, and portraying him as a staunch opponent of abortion, he was behind the scenes assuring pro-abortion senators like Susan Collins that he would never vote against Roe v. Wade, because it is established law. Furthermore, he promised Chuck Schumer, an ideological enemy of conservatism, the same thing in his 2006 appeals court confirmation.
Brett Kavanaugh was also instrumental, (something I tried to warn you about in this article), in helping write opinions that enabled Justice Roberts, a liberal in conservatives clothing, to justify the Obamacare mandate as a tax in the first place. Kavanaugh’s opinion at the time reflected his belief that the mandate was constitutional. What he is stating now is that if the mandate is found to be unconstitutional, which no decision has been made yet, the body of the law should stay in place without the mandate. Many people believe that without the individual tax, Obamacare becomes unenforceable. This is not true. If the law is unenforceable it is because it is 2,700 pages that went unread not only by congress, but the Supreme Court as well. Furthermore, there is an additional 20,000 pages of regulations which govern the implementation of Obamacare and I can assure you that none of us peasants know what the law fully entails. Getting rid of the mandate will not render the law useless. It is unlikely that even Brett Kavanaugh knows what Obamacare fully entails among those thousands of pages. He probably believes, like other liberals, that healthcare is a human right, and he is virtue signaling his compassion to the rest of the world by supporting the law.
There is hope that Amy Barrett may indeed be a strict originalist in her constitutional interpretations; however, the Brett Kavanaugh story warns us that we should take heed and proceed with caution when it comes to putting all of our faith into any politician. Many people aspiring to get into government service run on popular positions simply to get elected. Once in office, they show their true colors. Some people even run under the guise of the opposing party, if possible. Like most people, I do not want to see a Kamala Harris presidency. I do realize though, that sometimes people are not who they portray themselves to be.