The Supreme Court - Conservative Values Upheld
President Trump, no matter the controversy, will usually rise above the fray to victory.
July 16, 2018
The winds of change do constantly disrupt cycles, in the media, politics, and the culture. In a two-week time period, the president and members of his administration, for its zero-tolerance immigration policy, bore the brunt of the biased media, and the hate-filled hostile radical left. The following week the Supreme Court ruled on three cases in particular that favored conservative principles and the president’s policy positions.
Then, a hurricane with gale force winds blasted across the nation, Justice Kennedy announced his retirement, and Mr. Trump was again riding on a wave of victory, but who knows how long that will last? For now let us look at the three more important of the cases, although there were others of lesser consequence, which received little if any, media attention.
In Trump v. Hawaii, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling upheld the administration's Proclamation 9645, and the last iteration of the Travel Ban. The nations involved in the ban are Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. Chief Justice Roberts stated “the Proclamation is within the scope of presidential authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act;” this gives the president broad discretion, and thus reverses the lower court’s ruling on statutory grounds.
The Chief Justice qualified the decision and why the Proclamation was constitutional, writing “The Proclamation is expressly premised on legitimate purposes: preventing entry of nationals who cannot be adequately vetted and inducing other nations to improve their practices. The text says nothing about religion.”
In Janus v. AFSCME, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 vote ruled that government public sector workers have the right to decline offers to join a union, and cannot be required or made to help pay for any collective bargaining. Justice Samuel Alito writing for the majority wrote, “We conclude that this arrangement violates the free speech rights of nonmembers by compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern.” The court felt forcing workers to subsidize union activities violated the First Amendment.
The Court’s ruling denotes that public-sector unions could stand to lose millions of dollars and become less effective, politically and culturally. Justice Alito wrote, “We recognize that the loss of payments from non-members may cause unions to experience unpleasant transition costs in the short term, and may require unions to make adjustments in order to attract and retain members, but we must weigh these disadvantages against the considerable windfall the unions have received over the years,” and that "states and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from non-consenting employees." President Trump commented on social media shortly after the ruling that it was a "Big loss of the coffers of the Democrats!"
In NIFLA v. Becerra, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 ruling declared that California’s 2015 Reproductive Fact Act was unconstitutional. Pro-life groups, free speech advocates, people of conscience and faith celebrated the Courts decision. The case involved the California law that required pro-life pregnancy crisis centers, and other pregnancy assistance facilities - this would include those that are operated by religious institutions - to post on their premises what are essentially advertisements that would direct a woman to government-funded abortion clinics. There are about 1,350 pro-life-affirming centers” and 125 in California that hope to persuade an expectant mother toward parenting or adoption over abortion. NIFLA supports these centers legally and medically.
The Reproductive Fact Act was supported by then-California Attorney General and now-senator Kamala Harris, and abortion advocacy groups: Planned Parenthood, NARAL, National Abortion Federation, League of Women Voters in California, and Black Women for Wellness.
Justice Clarence Thomas writing for the majority accepted the free speech right argument that pro-life pregnancy centers should not be required to advertise abortion services. The Justice wrote, “Licensed clinics must provide a government-drafted script about the availability of state-sponsored services, as well as contact information for how to obtain them, and one of those services is abortion, which the centers are against.”
All told, the Trump administration and conservative values and principles were upheld by each of these Supreme Court decisions. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Neil M. Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito’s majority opinions overruled the four angry liberals on the Court - Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen G. Beyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.
This turn of events, especially Justice Kennedy’s announcement, has driven the Left in America even further into the abyss; a deep, dark place and what could be a point-of-no-return as their world continues to crumble around them. They are hyper-hysterical and have thrown everything at this president, but he seems to withstand the onslaught and then rise above the fray. God only knows what the repercussions would be if the Mueller investigation comes to an end without any negative implications toward Mr. Trump, and even more harrowing for the left would be if, in the November elections, Republicans retain both the Senate and House of Representatives. What should we do - RUN FOR THE HILLS?
Visit Bob Pascarella's website at www.ShortStoriesInVerse.com