, , , , , , , , ,

credit: en.wikipedia.org

This Second Civil War series is devoted to dealing with contemporary issues that could provoke a second civil war.  To find every article in this series, enter “second civil war” in the search bar on the SMM homepage.  It is written in the hope that such a conflagration might be avoided, particularly when Congressmen are actually suggesting they would use nuclear weapons to disarm–rather finally–Americans, as former Democrat presidential candidate Eric Swalwell of the People’s Republic of California did.

The foundation of this series, what must be the foundation for all Americans if, as Abraham Lincoln said, “government of the people, by the people and for the people, shall not perish from the earth,” is American constitutionalism.  The Constitution, unique in human history, is the supreme law of the land, and no attempt must be made to ignore, circumvent, abandon or in any way diminish it.  It may be changed only by means of strict adherence to the express amendment process in the Constitution.  The Constitution establishes the rule of law, and limits the government to preserve individual liberty.

In recent years, the Democrat/Socialist/Communist Party (D/S/C) has, for the first time, made it absolutely clear it does not subscribe to American constitutionalism, if indeed it ever really did.  For as long as I’ve been alive, and history teaches even longer than that, many politicians have seen the Constitution as merely an annoyance, an outdated, yellowing anachronism covered in fading ink, a hindrance to their utopian plans, to be imposed for the good of normal Americans not sufficiently intelligent, moral or evolved to be able to identify and act on their own good. Surely there are Republicans that feel the same way, such as contemporary Never Trumpers, but at least some of them may be motivated primarily by Trump induced insanity. There can no longer be any doubt, however, that the overwhelming majority of enemies of American constitutionalism are member of the D/S/C Party or fellow travelers.

Lincoln at Gettysburg
credit: smithsonianmagazine

This makes them enemies of normal Americans who recognize the centrality of the Constitution and willing reverence for it if the American experiment is to endure rather than descend into the depths and degradation of socialism and communism.  They are the primary drivers on the path to a Second Civil War.

“Oh but whadabout Republicans!?  They…”  If they honor the Constitution, if they support and defend it, they can scarcely be said to seek war to overturn it.

Among the continuing attempts to overturn the Constitution have been efforts to destroy the Second Amendment—to disarm the law-abiding—and to pack the Supreme Court.   D/S/Cs have long seen the courts, and particularly the Supreme Court, as a super legislature that will reliably give them whatever they can’t attain through the legitimate legislative process.  When a Republican president nominates someone to the Supreme Court, they scream they are out of the “judicial mainstream,” and do all they can to keep them from being confirmed.  Yet they vociferously scream for packing the Court with reliable D/S/C hacks to ensure the Constitution will be ignored and their policies upheld and never overturned.

As I’ve often written, the Second Amendment hangs only on the 5/4 majority of the Court, a majority not of “conservatives,” but of jurists who take seriously their oath to make decisions on the Constitution and the law.  Should D/S/C hacks again constitute a majority, the Second Amendment would likely not be entirely struck down–that would require an amendment–but it would be interpreted to have no meaning in terms of individual liberty.  There would be no anti-liberty/gun scheme they would find unconstitutional.  One need only read the minority—D/S/C—dissent in Heller to see the truth of this (I recommend it).  Or one might read my articles—here and here—on the same topic. Or merely read this Fox News report:

Several high-profile Senate Democrats warned the Supreme Court in pointed terms this week that it could face a fundamental restructuring if justices do not take steps to ‘heal’ the court in the near future.

The ominous and unusual warning was delivered as part of a brief filed Monday in a case related to a New York City gun law. Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., referenced rulings by the court’s conservative majority in claiming it is suffering from some sort of affliction which must be remedied.

‘The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it,’ the brief said. ‘Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.

If the public actually demanded such a thing, just as the public does not demand the gun control schemes of the D/S/Cs, the “healing” would have been done decades ago.  This is a crude and ugly threat, and a clear and present danger to the Republic. Still, it is something of a public service, as no one need any longer doubt the intentions of the D/S/Cs, intentions they have held but kept mostly under the radar for a very long time.

Democratic candidates, including former Rep. Beto O’Rourke of Texas, and Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Kamala Harris of California, and Gillibrand, all have signaled an openness to expanding the number of judges on the court should they reach the White House.

Imagine that.

South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg has also supported expanding the court, proposing a plan to have some justices appointed by the president and others selected by the other justices in order to ‘depoliticize’ the court. He’s admitted that the only way he can think of to make this work would be to increase the size of the court from nine justices to 15, while stressing that simply ‘adding more justices onto the court who agree with you’ would be a bad idea.

This is nearly a dictionary definition of misdirection and/or hypocrisy.  The Constitution mandates the best scheme to “depoliticize” the court.  Buttigieg and his ilk argue not against political justices, but for them.  It is the justices that rule on the Constitution and law they seek to displace. One certainly doesn’t “depoliticize the court” by threatening to dismantle or pack it if the court doesn’t do leftist’s bidding, on specific cases or in general.

What has caused the D/S/Cs to go overt?  The Second Amendment, of course:

The Democratic senators’ brief was filed in the case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. City of New York, which dealt with legal limitations on where gun owners could transport their licensed, locked, and unloaded firearms. They are urging the court to stay out of the case brought by the NRA-backed group, claiming that because the city recently changed the law to ease restrictions, the push to the Supreme Court is part of an ‘industrial-strength influence campaign’ to get the conservative majority to rule in favor of gun owners.

Not quite. Supporters of the Second Amendment have followed the law and proper, lawful procedure to work their way through the courts.  The importance of the case may reasonably be inferred from the fact the Court granted cert, something it does in only a tiny portion of the cases submitted each year. This is also significant in that post Heller and McDonald, the Court has studiously avoided Second Amendment cases—until now.

Professor Jacobson at Legal Insurrection has also commented on the issue:

 The closing paragraph was at best a thinly-veiled threat (emphasis added):

‘The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.’ Particularly on the urgent issue of gun control, a nation desperately needs it to heal.’

This was not so much a legal argument, but a shot across the bow of the Court and Chief Justice Roberts in particular.

Nice Court you have there, Chief, shame if something happened to it.

And at Fox News, Lindsey Graham suggests a will to stop any court packing scheme:

The NRA also noted:

This brief is nothing more than a desperate attempt by anti-gun politicians hoping to prop up New York City’s blatantly unconstitutional prohibition on the transport of legally owned firearms outside the home,’ NRA spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement to Fox News.

So it is.  Unwilling to adhere to the Constitution and the law, and unwilling to honor honest elections, D/S/Cs have turned to threatening the Supreme Court if it dares uphold the Constitution.  Democrats provoked the first Civil War over issues of equality and liberty.  Now they seek to do it again.