Bookmark today’s show as one of your classics. Today, I explain, once and for all, using several recent Supreme Court opinions, why the Supreme Court is nowhere close to having an originalist majority and why there is only one consistent originalist. Kavanaugh and Roberts are completely problematic. 

I delve through three cases – the Bladensburg cross case, a capital conviction case, and a criminal alien gun conviction case – to demonstrate why the Supreme Court is a one-way street and a dead end for conservatives. Even if we had five Clarence Thomasas, we should never legitimize judicial supremacy. But we only have one. The result? We get the worst of everyone’s sensibilities and the Left keeps winning, even when we win narrow defensive victories on a few cases in the Supreme Court out of the many they allow to stand in their unconstitutional status at lower courts.   

Show links

Flowers v. Mississippi

Rehaif v. U.S.

Bladensburg Cross case  

My take on Bladensburg Cross

My 2016 piece on Roberts and overturning capital convictions on nonsensical grounds

Copyright Blaze Media All Rights Reserved.

Bookmark today&rsquo;s show as one of your classics. Today, I explain, once and for all, using several recent Supreme Court opinions, why the Supreme Court is nowhere close to having an originalist majority and why there is only one consistent originalist. Kavanaugh and Roberts are completely problematic.&nbsp;
I delve through three cases &ndash; the Bladensburg cross case, a capital conviction case, and a criminal alien gun conviction case &ndash; to demonstrate why the Supreme Court is a one-way street and a dead end for conservatives. Even if we had five Clarence Thomasas, we should never legitimize judicial supremacy. But we only have one. The result? We get the worst of everyone&rsquo;s sensibilities and the Left keeps winning, even when we win narrow defensive victories on a few cases in the Supreme Court out of the many they allow to stand in their unconstitutional status at lower courts.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Show links
<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-9572_k536.pdf">Flowers v. Mississippi</a>
<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-9560_e2p3.pdf">Rehaif v. U.S.</a>
<a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-1717_4f14.pdf">Bladensburg Cross case&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;
<a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/bladensburg-cross-pyrrhic-victory-conservatives-supreme-court/">My take on Bladensburg Cross</a>
<a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/federal-courts-screw-conservatives/">My 2016 piece on Roberts and overturning capital convictions on nonsensical grounds</a>
Copyright Blaze Media All Rights Reserved.

In Washington, politicians are full of half-truths and hot air. They do little more than grandstanding by spouting-off talking points and spin. 

The Conservative Review with Daniel Horowitz is here to help you cut through the rhetoric and noise and explore the politically right way to think about the issues .

One of the most insightful conservative minds in America– Conservative Review’s Senior Editor, DANIEL HOROWITZ.

Advertisement