Law School ‘Democracy’ Scholar Recommends Removing VA Judges Who Voted Down Redistricting
“Democrats might prefer other solutions, but if they want to see the will of the voters respected in time for the November elections, there are virtually no other options”
These people do not give a damn about democracy or norms, as you may have noticed. They care only about power.
The College Fix reports:
Law school ‘democracy’ scholar: Remove Virginia judges who voted down redistricting
Democrats should push through legislation to lower the mandatory retirement age of Virginia Supreme Court in order to remove justices who ruled a gerrymandered map unconstitutional, a “democracy” scholar argued.
Quinn Yeargain, who uses “they/them/theirs” pronouns and whose real name is Tyler, made the argument on Saturday. Yeargain is the “1855 Professor of Law of Democracy” at Michigan State University, according to the scholar’s faculty website.
Writing at Downballot, Yeargain said Democrats should lower the retirement age to 54, outwardly saying the goal would be to remove the youngest justice who made what the professor considers the wrong decision.
Yeargain wrote on May 8:
States around the country with similar laws mandate retirement across a wide range of ages. Virginia lawmakers can simply lower theirs. Make it 54 for Supreme Court justices—the age of the youngest justice, Stephen McCullough, who joined the majority opinion—and make it take effect immediately.
Yeargain said this is the best solution to get through the gerrymandered map.
“Democrats might prefer other solutions, but if they want to see the will of the voters respected in time for the November elections, there are virtually no other options—and none with as good a chance of success as this one,” the professor wrote.
However, legal scholars have questioned the idea, with Professor Jonathan Turley calling the proposal “abusive.”
He warned:
Notably, the sack-and-pack scheme sets aside any pretense of principle. The Democrats would simply adopt a ridiculously low retirement age for the sole purpose of populating the court with reliable and robotic justices. The fact that an academic and various pundits would expressly float such an idea is another chilling reminder of the growing radicalization on the left.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Every time I hear the word scholar. I can’t help but see a vision of some citizen issuing edicts to Americans as if law is a religion.
“Rule of law” means having laws that are not only fair and reflect the actual will of the people, but are enacted, and enforced, in accordance with the constitution, either state or federal.
In the case of Virginia’s redistricting debacle, state courts, including the Virginia Supreme Court, determined that the constitutional process for amending the state constitution was not followed. In other words, they did not follow the state constitution and observe the ‘Rule of Law’ to put the measure on the ballot for the voters’ consideration.
They were not asked to rule on the ‘fairness’ or ‘propriety’ of the new district map, only whether it was properly presented to the voters.
They did not “vote down redistricting.” They determined that the state legislature did not follow the procedure required by the constitution to present the question to the voters.
How many times have we all seen actions challenged and struck down at the federal level for not following the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act?
“Democrats might prefer other solutions, but if they want to see the will of the voters respected in time for the November elections, there are virtually no other options—and none with as good a chance of success as this one,”
Wasn’t it the will of the voters to have an independent commission draw districts instead of the legislature?
The whole process of not following the laws, the double speak of the ballot language, and suspending the independent commission “just this one time” stinks to high Heaven.
“Quinn Yeargain, who uses “they/them/theirs” pronouns and whose real name is Tyler”
I’m tired of replacing bent needles on my Narcissism Meter.
“The Democrats would simply adopt a ridiculously low retirement age for the sole purpose of populating the court with reliable and robotic justices.”
Remember the 60’s- never trust anyone over 30?