Top House Dem Issues Troubling Threat to Supreme Court Justices

Establishment figures, particularly those aligned with the Democratic Party elite, often reveal themselves as either misguided or malevolent.

The dominance of these qualities varies depending on the situation and the individual in question.

On Monday, Democratic Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the House Minority Leader, responded to the Supreme Court’s moderate ruling in former President Donald Trump’s immunity case by making a dramatic statement regarding the U.S. Constitution.

“House Democrats will engage in aggressive oversight and legislative activity with respect to the Supreme Court to ensure that the extreme, far-right justices in the majority are brought into compliance with the Constitution,” Jeffries said, as reported by congressional reporter Max Cohen of Punchbowl News.

Democrats have pursued Trump with four criminal indictments, aimed at hindering his presidential campaign.

One such indictment in New York, clearly politically motivated, resulted in a May 30 conviction on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

Another indictment, by special counsel Jack Smith, sought to support the establishment’s “insurrection” narrative by charging Trump with crimes related to the Capitol incident of Jan. 6, 2021, and Trump’s protest against the 2020 presidential election.

In Monday’s 6-3 opinion, SCOTUS ruled that the Constitution requires “at least a presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for a President’s acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility.”

SCOTUS did not exonerate Trump but clarified that presidents have immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts.

Moreover, it did not define the boundary between acts performed in an official capacity and those of an unofficial nature.

Interpreting constitutional principles in politically charged criminal cases is challenging, but SCOTUS succeeded in upholding the independence of the executive branch.

With the 2020-election-related prosecution delayed, Trump declared victory.

This outcome was likely intolerable for Jeffries and others affected by Trump Derangement Syndrome.

The establishment’s relentless efforts to maintain power and undermine Trump were evident in 2020 when they manipulated a virus to harm the economy and created chaos.

Such actions indicate a disdain for the Constitution, suggesting an authoritarian mindset.

Assuming Jeffries is simply misguided, he may not realize that Congress lacks authority over the Supreme Court.

Therefore, he might be surprised to learn that all the “aggressive oversight and legislative activity” would amount to mere theatrics.

As any fifth grader knows, the Constitution separates legislative and judicial powers.

Under Article III, the Constitution allows Congress only to establish lower courts and remove judges through impeachment—a process meant to protect judicial independence from political figures like Jeffries.

Moreover, Congress cannot alter the federal judiciary’s authority, which is derived from the People.

Thus, thanks to the Founding Fathers, Jeffries has no power to bring SCOTUS into his version of “compliance with the Constitution.”