|Have you heard what Donald Trump did? He fired the Rule|
of Law, and then nuked Article III through the power of his
words. Lovers of liberty, Donald Trump is coming, Trump is
coming. Or, perhaps hysteria and delusion have set in.
In the hour of darkness and peril and need,
The people will waken and listen to hear
The hurrying hoof-beats of that steed,
And the midnight message of Chuck Todd.
Tracing his lineage to Gutenberg, Todd offered to take criticism emitting from Donald Trump against U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel on behalf of the "press," warning Trump should stop saying mean things about federal judges such as Curiel.
Trump is "eroding the rule of law," ... "eroding trust in the judiciary," warned Todd. "That's a slippery slope."
Todd didn't specify the darkness to which the slippery slope leads, but his comments follow by days the hysteria of Adam Liptak and the New York Times in similar grandiose posturing regarding the judiciary and the rule of law.
As a historical figure, surly Todd has studied in some detail the American judiciary and its oppression of American citizens who sometimes look to the judicial branch when, most commonly, individual states target Constitutional rights of disfavored swaths of the citizenry.
Have not noticed Todd defending civil liberties against incursions from the Republican-ruled red states. Or for that matter from the Federalist Society's approved federal judges who carry out the intentions of the Koch brothers and the Bradley Foundation.
Should we be concerned Donald Trump will loosen federal libel doctrine as Trump once blustered. No. How would Trump accomplish this? Trump didn't say, and neither has Todd, the Times nor the Post. [In February, Trump said, "One of the things I'm going to do if I win, and I hope we do and we're certainly leading. I'm going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We're going to open up those libel laws. So when The New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they're totally protected," (The Politico)].
Trump is hardly the first politician to express dissatisfaction with, or to venture the outlines of a bone-headed argument against New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964).
Federal Judiciary Deserves No Trust
Perhaps Todd could cast his gaze at the United States Supreme Court. Immigrant families face a more present danger from rightwing judges as they await word whether the corrupt and ideologically bankrupt U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen's attacks will carry the day in United States v. Texas, (No. 15-674) (Denniston, SCOTUSBlog).
Hanen and his ilk are human garbage. Much more dangerous than the ravings of the whiny and incoherent Donald Trump.
Federal litigants face a roll of the dice in the federal judiciary. Nothing better.
Meanwhile, the farce of the American electoral process continues, with no alarm sounded by Chuck Todd and the New York Times, (CounterPunch).
Morning Joe Tuesday, June 7, 2016