The Christian Solution

C   S  
Home Page   About TCS   Contact Us   Document Library  
May 2017 AD

Another Scalia
Another Roberts?

This article, if anything, proves President Trump has not kept another of his campaign promises to the American public of selecting conservative judges who will uphold the Constitution.

Chief Justice Roberts was appointed by George W Bush to the praise of RINO Republicans everywhere and yes, Chief Justice Roberts proceeded onward to become the central figure in upholding the unconstitutional ObamaCare as Constitutional.

No surprise here, as W's father, George H.W. Bush had appointed the always-liberal David Souter to the bench.

"Half-Jewish" Republican Eisenhower appointed the destroy-the-Constitution Earl Warren.

So when we are presented with a man whom the RINO Republicans are praising as 99% upheld, to me that SCREAMS ESTABLISHMENT!

When far more than half the decisions of the Supreme Court these days are against the Constitution, and his decisions ALWAYS align with Supreme Court decisions, then I want to know how he can, under penalty of perjury before a Senate confirmation hearing, say that he is a Constitutional originalist?

Does this not prove already he has committed a dire perjury?

Do we want a Supreme Court justice who lies about the most critical elements of his duties?

Clarence Thomas was the real deal.

How did you know?  Democrats tried to slander his good name. They tried to say his past record was abysmal.

How do you know Neil Gorsuch is not the real deal?

Easy, Democrats say he has a good record and they have made no attempts to slandered his good name.

We need real Americans to oppose the Democrat appointed in-justices. 

Jewish, because his mother was Jewish, Obama appointed 2 liberal Jews, as did Jewish puppet Bill Clinton who also appointed 2 liberal Jews.


Abortion: the infamous litmus test.

And Gorsuch failed.

"It would be a mistake that originalism turns on the secret intents of the drafter of the language of the law," Gorsuch said. When it comes to equal protection, he added, "it matters not a whit that some of the drafters of the 14th Amendment were racists, because they were. Or whether they were sexists, because they were. The law they drafted means equal protection for everybody, which is what they wrote."
--Neil Gorsuch

Calling our Founders racists and sexists is not a good start in passing the litmus test -- on the conservative side.

Of course, he passed this anti-American litmus test with flying colors.

When asked in his confirmation hearings if President Trump ever asked him how he would vote on abortion, Gorsuch infamously replied:

That point came into sharper relief when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) asked what Gorsuch would do if Trump asked for a commitment to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that legalized abortion.

“Senator, I would’ve walked out the door,” Gorsuch said forcefully. “Not what judges do.”

Still, Gorsuch declined to say whether Roe was correctly decided more than four decades ago, saying merely it is a “precedent” of the Supreme Court.
--Neil Gorsuch

Do you see the duplicity here? 

President does not get to grill his own nominee, saying he would walk out the door; while staying in place as liberals in Congress grills him on the exact same question.

This is a man who will uphold Roe v. Wade.

This is a man who will continue to condone a genocidal Holocaust against innocent children.


You can forget Gorsuch standing up to the lowest federal judges threatening the Separation of Powers -- by actually taking on all those duties themselves -- as he is one of those.

If this is true, Gorsuch is a judicial tyrant.

And we are stuck with all the illegal immigrants as well.

In particular, he has written opinions vigorously defending the paramount duty of the courts to say what the law is, without deferring to the executive branch’s interpretations of federal statutes, including our immigration laws.

In a pair of immigration cases, De Niz Robles v. Lynch and Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch, Judge Gorsuch ruled against attempts by the government to retroactively interpret the law to disfavor immigrants. In a separate opinion in Gutierrez-Brizuela, he criticized the legal doctrine that federal courts must often defer to the executive branch’s interpretations of federal law, warning that such deference threatens the separation of powers designed by the framers.

Nuclear Option

Today is April 2, the day after April Fools day, so I am not fooling you here.

We are days away from Gorsuch's vote and I predict the Democrats actually love this guy and will never filibuster him.

All the hate against Gorsuch by the Democrats is just kabuki theater.

Rand Paul should filibuster this fraud from the right, and Gorsuch's name should be removed from contention.

Then a real conservative should be appointed to insure we have someone who would fairly offset the rabid left-wing  opinions on the  Court.

How do we know when we have a good candidate?  The Democrats actual do force us to use the nuclear option instead of just threaten to filibuster.

You can read further at The Problem
You can read further at Guide to "Checks and Balances"
You can read further at The Solution
Write us at

Article located at:

Last Hope for America
Christian Libertarian: Harmonious Union
Church and State

The Christian Solution             First Release: March 15, 2008