… does the pope have? This question is sometimes attributed to Napoleon Bonaparte, way back in 1810 or so. Stalin (yes, THAT Uncle Joe) cribbed it in 1945, asking “how many divisions does the Pope of Rome have?”
Whether it is battalions or divisions, our question today is “how many battalions does the Supreme Court have?”
With all the various seemingly anti-establishment decisions handed down the past couple of weeks, it is essential that we need to understand that when it comes to government – federal, state, tribal, or local – compliance with the SCOTUS’ decisions is virtually voluntary. IF, indeed, governments and people comply.
Yep, there is a US Marshal’s Service, with 94 US Marshals in the 94 federal judicial districts, with less than 5,500 people total and a budget of about 1.5 billion bucks. Although they do end up arresting a lot of nasty (and not so nasty) people on various things, most of their action is actually protecting about 40,000 various officials from threats. They boast of “enforcing court orders” but that seems a bit limited. Protecting witnesses, delivering paperwork and prisoners. Busting people for contempt of court. Oh, and stealing things: asset forfeiture. A very brave and honorable profession, eh?
But no attack aircraft. No armored vehicles (except maybe prisoner transport buses?). No combat troops.
So if a State or a county or city or tribe decide to ignore a court decision – a court order – the Supremes apparently can do little but issue a citation for contempt of court. And if the cited person refuses? Well, apparently no SWAT team or much else.
So how does the vaunted US Court System enforce its decisions? Well…
Apparently through “moral suasion” it seems. Or to put it another way, by tradition of bowing the knee, intimidation, winning “public opinion” (which means the mainstream media and now social media and loud populist politicians and activists), and – more court actions until finally someone with guns (local cops, maybe, or the FBI/DEA/armed USFS and IRS agents?) goes to arrest someone. Oh, and of course, steal anything they can by asset forfeiture and/or tax liens. But only IF the “political will” is there. Otherwise, the scofflaws (or the powers-that-be that don’t agree with the decision) go ahead and do whatever they want to.
What a kind, gentle, efficient, compassionate and above all MORAL way of handling matters.
Which is apparently exactly where things are going down with three of the recent decisions:
- The EPA loss of power
- NY edicts for prohibiting concealed-carry knocked down
- Overturning Roe v. Wade
David Horowitz, in his own commentary, concentrated on the gun decision. Not only have a number of States proclaimed intent to “protect” their citizens by ignoring the Nazgul (Maryland, Mass, Delaware, among others), some have brazenly defied the Nazgul by quickly moving to implement MORE unconstitutional, immoral, and insane anti-gun, anti-liberty, anti-self-defense laws and regulations: New York, California, even Colorado (not mentioned by Horowitz).
Why? Because they can get away with it. Just as they dragged their feet for years after the Heller decision. And unlike all the various pork-laden laws of Congress, they don’t even have purse-strings as an “enforcement” measure. And because the feet-draggers can pretend that a plurality of “the people” can agree or at least won’t fight back.
Horowitz does directly compare the past law-making by the Nazgul regarding so-called “same-sex” marriage (the Obergefell decision) overturning millennia of human understanding and centuries of law, with the Dobbs case. “Same-sex” marriage was rammed down the throats of States and local government within days if not hours: no time to revise laws, go to court to resolve related issues, etc. Just as with the Heller decision but unlike Obergefell, the Dobbs decision has already spawned dozens of court cases, massive demands and outrageous claims, and more. In many, it is federal judges who are clearly resisting their own supposed hierarchy.
In the same way, the SCOTUS ruling that EPA does NOT have authority to implement some of the current regime’s key mandates to “fight global warming is being resisted. Not just by States, who have the legal and constitutional right and power to do that – but by the EPA and other government agencies. Including (as with abortion and gun control) the White House itself.
And who has the battalions? Is it the State of South Dakota or a potentially-federalized National Guard together with the USAF, to open illegal abortion clinics on Camp Rapid, Joe Foss Air National Guard Base, and Ellsworth AFB? And possibly even such clinics at VA medical centers in Fort Meade and Sioux Falls, and Indian Health Service facilities on Pine Ridge, the Rosebud, Cheyenne River, Sisseton-Wahpeton and Flandreau? The former (and future?) Republic of Texas or an entire Armored Corps at Fort Hood (no doubt to soon be renamed Fort Wilson or some such?).
Please understand, we here at TPOL are NOT advocating for the Supreme Court or the Marshal’s Service to be given commands of troops armed and ready to go out and enforce court decisions through aggression and violence. We are simply pointing out that the system we are saddled with is one which strongly favors TAKING LIBERTIES AWAY. Not seeking to defend them (whatever the recruiting ads say) and not allowing for enforcement of the Bill of Rights.