Trump's new Attorney General doesn't believe in judicial review
12 replies, posted
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/09/matthew-whitaker-rosenstein-replacement-trump-loyalist-deputy-attorney-general.html?gtm=top>m=bottom
On Saturday morning, Kelly called Jeff Sessions’s top aide, Matthew G. Whitaker, and informed him that he would soon be deputy attorney general, according to the New York Times.
Whitaker is a former U.S. Attorney and 2014 Senate candidate in Iowa, who. joined the Justice Department last fall. Here are a few things that he has publicly claimed to believe:
• Robert Mueller has no legitimate authority to investigate the Trump Organization’s finances, and if he does (which, he has), “then this would raise serious concerns that the special
counsel’s investigation was a mere witch hunt.”
• Donald Trump was right to fire James Comey — because James Comey should have prosecuted Hillary Clinton:
• All federal judges should be “people of faith” who take “a biblical view of justice.”
• The Supreme Court is “supposed to be the inferior branch of our three branches of government,” and has claimed far too much power for itself. Specifically, Whittaker says that
Marbury v. Madison — the case that gave the court the power to strike down duly enacted laws — was wrongly decided, as the Supreme Court should not be “ final arbiter of
constitutional issues.”
But if there’s one thing Whitaker hates more than the Supreme Court striking down laws it regards as unconstitutional, it’s when “unelected judges” refuse to strike down laws that
conservatives don’t like:
Unelected judges are deciding many of the issues of the day. There are so many (bad rulings). I would start with the idea of Marbury v. Madison. That’s probably a good place to start
and the way it’s looked at the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of constitutional issues. We’ll move forward from there. All New Deal cases that were expansive of the federal
government. Those would be bad. Then all the way up to the Affordable Care Act and the individual mandate.
• There shouldn’t have been an independent counsel’s investigation into Russian interference because there wasn’t such an investigation into the Obama administration’s many
scandals:
Marbury v. Madison is the most important legal decision in the history of the United States and the foundation of the American judiciary.
What a shock.
Surprise! He an unpatriotic stooge doing Agent Orange’s bidding.
I seriously can't believe how this man became an attorney
This just blows my fucking mind that there's someone with a law degree in this country that thinks judicial review is wrong.
You would think it is super easy to get one when all these morons are running around with them.
Wait so, okay my limits of my own government are getting past me but he doesn't believe in Judicial Review but he's in the department that gives out final decisions involving Judicial Reviews.
Is this asshole just trying to make an excuse to not do his job?
Roy Moore's law professor nicknamed him "Fruit Salad" since he was such a poor student
i would say an excuse to not do his job (unless doing his job is mutually beneficial to both him and Lord Spraytannus
This guy isn’t a real lawyer, is he? He probably has some bogus online law degree that isn’t valid, right? Also, can any other branch of government remove him? This guy is by far the single worst pick for any position in Trump’s government. He exists solely to obstruct justice and nothing more.
He got an MBA, JD, and BA from the University of Iowa
Nope. It's up to the Senate, specifically.
Yeah I'd feel embarrassed if I had a law degree. Good thing I'm a math major and there aren't people with math degrees running around out there saying "you know what, Gauss is wrong, you CAN violate Gauss's law" and then proceed to get a job that affects everyone
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.