"Buck Throckmorton" is the pen name of a sagacious businessman who writes for Ace of Spades and a couple of other publications. He's not a bomb-thrower but he does not pull punches.
He has a suggestion for Donald Trump: hold a 4-person colloquy on the Courts.
...perhaps President Trump might compel a reluctant John Roberts to take action in a more genteel way. Quite simply, the president can organize and host a summit of the leaders of the three branches of government to discuss constitutional roles and responsibilities of the branches of government they lead, and how they constitutionally interact with each other. There should be just four attendees at the summit: President Trump, Chief Justice John Roberts, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune....
The discussion will center on Article Two's first sentence, of course.
Throckmorton has ideas!!
• Ask Roberts, Johnson and Thune their understanding of the role of federal judges, what constitutional powers they have, and why.
• Ask Roberts if he defends the rogue activism of district judges. If so, explain why. If not, advise why it is being allowed.
• Discuss what the Executive and Legislative branch “checks” on the judiciary are in our “checks and balances” system. What powers do Congress and the Executive Branch have to check rogue judges?
• Should there be more balance in the application of checks and balances? Courts are very aggressive about checking other branches’ powers. Why are there no checks being imposed on the judiciary?
• Ask Roberts his opinion on judges who are routinely overruled. Is repeatedly being overruled by appellate courts a sufficient reason for impeachment?
And most importantly…
• How will Chief Justice Roberts respond if/when Trump announces that rogue federal judges have no constitutional authority to manage the executive Branch, and Trump will no longer comply with their rulings....
There is not enough time to run all the obnoxious, unjustified, or just plain obstreperous "rulings" through the appellate process, and--frankly--the more the Rogue Gang plays its silly game, the more the Common Man in this country grows impatient--and angry--with them.
Something that Roberts should consider for a nice three-day weekend. MLK weekend will do.
7 comments:
“Ask Roberts if he defends the rogue activism of district judges.”
Big assumption there, Chief. Buck doesn’t like the rulings made by an independent judiciary. Go figure.
“Ask Roberts his opinion on judges who are routinely overruled.”
Even conservative judges?
“How will Chief Justice Roberts respond if/when Trump announces that rogue federal judges have no constitutional authority to manage the executive Branch, and Trump will no longer comply with their rulings”
John is too polite to tell Trump to pound sand. Trump would be violating his sworn oath to uphold the law. Not that he is ever interested in that…
He's right about there being no real checks on the judiciary. While the appeals process serves as an internal check, our system is supposed to be based on a balance of the three branches checking each other. The impeachment process has become too politicized and the only check available to the administrative branch is to ask the court to check itself through the appeals process or to disobey the court, which is a drastic step.
There needs to be other steps to check the court short of impeachment but that would probably take a constitutional amendment.
Obstreperous. Made me work for that one.
Anony1: SCOTUS and various appeals courts don't like Bo-Ass-Berg and lots of other "judges," either, based on the high percentage of reversals (25 or 30 or something like that).
At least Buck isn't asking for a public hanging of these jackasses-in-blackasses. Yet....
“SCOTUS and various appeals courts don't like Bo-Ass-Berg and lots of other "judges”
Similar to activist conservative judges?
.”At least Buck isn't asking for a public hanging of these jackasses-in-blackasses. Yet....”
He and you are too chickenshit due that. So no real threat.
“He's right about there being no real checks on the judiciary.”
Wrong. Checks on the judiciary include the President's power to nominate judges (which the Senate confirms) and issue pardons, Congress's ability to impeach judges, control court funding, propose constitutional amendments to overturn rulings, and define the courts' jurisdiction, plus the public's role in electing officials who appoint and confirm judges.
“The impeachment process has become too politicized”
Unless Trump wields it, right?
“to disobey the court, which is a drastic step.”
Channel your inner Andrew Jackson.
How Often Lefty Judges’ Anti-Trump Efforts Get Smacked Down
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2026/01/14/january-14th-2026-presidential-politics-trump-administration-day-360/#more-279683
…….A district judge does not dictate immigration policy, determine where funds can be spent, or order a deportation flight back. It’s comical. And when people with no law degrees can sniff out the BS, you know it’s a special kind of left-wing trash.
Strip them of their robes, break their gavels, and kick their asses to the curb. Enough…….
Post a Comment