Biden Tries To Spread His Hypocrisy To The Supreme Court

In an op-ed in the Washington Post, Lame Duck and brain-dead Joe Biden proposed three changes to the Supreme Court today. The Democrats have been stewing for years, demanding the court be overhauled because former President Donald Trump had the opportunity to appoint three justices.

The hypocrisy is that Biden and Democrats wouldn’t even think about demanding change if the Supreme Court had ruled the way they wanted on abortion, presidential immunity, executive-branch power, student-loan forgiveness, the Second Amendment, and other issues. What Biden won’t tell you is that these rulings were in accordance with the Constitution, something else that they would love to tear up and disregard. Remember, Biden is the same president who disregarded and disrespected the Supreme Court’s decision on bailing out school loans. Which unfairly forced even more debt on the American people.

In his op-ed, which he most certainly did not compose, Biden proposed a new constitutional amendment called the “No One Is Above the Law Amendment.”

Within that proposal, Biden said this:

“It would make clear that there is no immunity for crimes a former president committed while in office. I share our Founders’ belief that the president’s power is limited, not absolute. We are a nation of laws, not of kings or dictators.”

I know; try not to laugh. As usual, Biden is wrong. Worse, he’s lying to mislead the American people. What Biden is saying is not what the Supreme Court ruled.

“The President is not above the law,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts in Trump v. United States.

Contrary to what Biden claims, the limits of presidential power are clear: The president is immune from criminal prosecution only in cases when he is carrying out his “official” presidential duties. That’s why former President Barack Obama was never prosecuted for droning American citizens.

On the other hand, a president does not enjoy immunity for “unofficial acts” those not within his constitutional duties as chief executive.

Biden next proposed term limits for Supreme Court justices, suggesting a system in which each president would appoint a justice every two years, and each justice would serve 18 years on the court. He stated that the United States is the only major constitutional democracy that gives lifetime seats to its highest court. Some democracies impose term limits, while others, like the United Kingdom, impose age limits.

Biden wrote that:

“term limits would help ensure that the court’s membership changes with some regularity. ” adding that term limits “reduce the chance that any single presidency radically alters the makeup of the court for generations to come.”

Biden’s proposal did not address some questions that have arisen in discussions about term limits for Supreme Court justices. These questions include how the limits would be implemented and whether they could be established by statute or would instead require a constitutional amendment.

However, any discussions about term limits are mute, as Legal scholar Anthony Marcum explained at USA Today:

“Although well-intentioned, term limits have a problem. Not only are they unconstitutional, but they will also have the exact opposite result that proponents wish for. Moreover, term limits will ensure that court vacancies are inextricably tied to every presidential race and have the potential to create abrupt ideological shifts on the highest court, only increasing the political scrutiny. In other words, term limits will not lower the temperature around nominations; they will leave the country scorched.

Yet term limits would regularize the process and, in turn, tie two Supreme Court seats to every presidential cycle. A single two-term president could pick 44 percent of the court. If two presidents of the same party served three or four consecutive terms, an overwhelming majority of the court would quickly be ideologically one-sided. A court of eight Scalias could turn to eight Ginsburgs in only a few years. Indeed, the chance for such a dramatic ideological shift in the highest court would only put a greater spotlight on it during presidential elections and judicial confirmations.”

Biden’s third and final proposed change is to implement a binding code of conduct for Supreme Court justices. Currently, the justices are not subjected to the same code of conduct that applies to other federal judges. Following recent revelations about issues such as the failure of some justices, particularly Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, to disclose luxury travel in their financial reports, the justices adopted their own code of conduct last November.

Biden dismissed the justices’ code of conduct as “weak and self-enforced.” “Justices, should be required to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest. Every other federal judge is bound by an enforceable code of conduct, and there is no reason for the Supreme Court to be exempt.”

Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and many others have made millions with inside trading and other schemes, while Joe and Hunter Biden have embezzled much more than that from foreign governments. So, for Biden to feign outrage over a code of conduct for the Supreme Court is laughable.

The Supreme Court imposing its own ethical code doesn’t mean it’s not accountable. The left has long accused Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito of ethical improprieties but can’t provide any evidence to support their claims. This is nothing more than a corrupt old man trying to appease a disturbed and perverted base of supporters. America never needed the likes of Joe Biden or his nimrod vice president, and the sooner they are voted out of office, the better.