A good week!

July 29, 2023

          This brief newsletter is intended to open reader comments for the weekend. As always, please be respectful and “like” worthy comments to promote them to the top. New comments appear at the bottom of the thread (if you can’t find your comment after posting).

          The shocking details of Trump's attempted destruction of evidence alleged in the Superseding Indictment obscured one fact for which all Americans should be thankful: the incredible tenacity and thoroughness of special prosecutor Jack Smith. Indicting a former president should not be undertaken lightly. The strength of the indictment filed by Jack Smith has undoubtedly quelled some of the outrage that Trump's supporters will gin up in their attempt to elect Trump in 2024.

          We are fortunate that Merrick Garland selected Jack Smith for the job of special prosecutor. It is difficult to imagine that anyone could have done a better job under such time constraints. Regardless of how the prosecutions turn out, the American people have a strong advocate representing their interests in the cases against Donald Trump.

          More good economic news this week confirmed that Bidenomics is working. Everyone from Fox News anchors to Marjorie Taylor Greene has conceded the strength of the economy. The only people who need to be louder and more enthusiastic in their praise of the economy are Democrats and major media outlets. Let’s do our part in pumping up the volume!

          Justice Alito secured his place in history as the Court’s cranky old man yelling at Americans to “get off my lawn!” He was featured in a sweetheart interview in the Wall Street Journal on Friday. The interviewer who wrote the fawning report on the embittered justice is a lawyer who has two cases pending before—wait for it—Justice Alito and his colleagues on the Supreme Court! What about that setup could possibly give rise to the appearance of impropriety? Answer: Everything.

          Justice Alito flipped his judicial middle finger at the American people during the interview by saying,

Congress did not create the Supreme Court” and that while it might be “controversial” to say so, “No provision in the Constitution gives [lawmakers] the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period.

          For a guy who is supposed to be smart, that is one of the stupidest statements ever uttered by a Supreme Court Justice. First, to state the obvious, Congress funds the Court. It can reduce the Court’s lavish budgets and give each justice a 4x4 cubicle in the WeWork shared-office space in D.C. Congress has the power to remove the justices through impeachment. Congress has the power to enlarge the Court. Each of those powers has the effect of regulating the Court.

          Finally, Congress—not the Supreme Court—is empowered to limit the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. (The original jurisdiction of the Court set forth in the Constitution is limited to cases involving “Ambassadors, Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party.”)

The “Exceptions Clause” of the Constitution addresses the appellate jurisdiction of the Court and states:

In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

          See that word—“regulation”—in the Exceptions Clause? Alito apparently forgot about the Exceptions Clause when he said, “No provision in the Constitution gives [lawmakers] the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period.”

          So, if Congress decides it can’t trust guys like Alito to behave themselves while sitting as an appellate court of last resort, Congress can simply remove appellate review from the Supreme Court or impose regulations on the ability of the Court when exercising such review!

          Stay out of the heat over the weekend if you can!

          Talk to you on Monday!