Skip to content

Hmm, Which Authoritarian Statist Will Trump Pick to Be the Next Supreme Bureaucrat?

On Donald Trump’s list of judges to be the next SCOTUS Justice is 11th Circuit Judge William Pryor. In May I wrote this about Judge Pryor:

According to Reason, “Pryor came out firmly in defense of every state’s unbridled power to incarcerate consenting adults for the supposed crime of having same-sex relations in the privacy of their own homes. ‘The States can and must legislate morality.’ To rule otherwise, Pryor’s brief declared, would be to enshrine a ‘sophomoric libertarian mantra’.”

Reason noted that Pryor believes in judicial deference, in which judges ought to defer to government bureaucrats’ authority and judgment (i.e. he’s a fascist, not a protector of the people, not a supporter of liberty).

Well, Judge Pryor is at it again, in his rubber-stamping of suspicion-less searches of cell phones at the border.

“We see no reason why the Fourth Amendment would require suspicion for a forensic search of an electronic device when it imposes no such requirement for a search of other personal property. Just as the United States is entitled to search a fuel tank for drugs, see Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. at 155, it is entitled to search a flash drive for child pornography.”

The “United States is entitled”? Yech. Just let the government go on a fishing expedition for child pornography? Even if you don’t suspect someone specific of committing some specific, actual crime?

He is saying that the Fourth Amendment does not require suspicion for searching “personal property”?

The Fourth Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Pryor also writes in this latest bad decision: “Although it may intrude on the privacy of the owner, a forensic search of an electronic device is a search of property. And our precedents do not require suspicion for intrusive searches of any property at the border.”

It doesn’t matter whether it’s at the border, within the border, or wherever. The Fourth Amendment is referring to the “right of the people to be secure…,” the right to be free of intrusions or aggressions into one’s person or effects, etc., which is a part of the people’s natural rights, their unalienable rights to life and liberty as referenced in the Declaration of Independence. The “right of the people to be secure” is not a right that has been granted to us by the government.

So given how authoritarian and anti-American Donald Trump is in his anti-due process, anti-civil liberties neanderthalism, I wouldn’t be surprise that Trump would pick Pryor. (Would Richard Pryor have been better?) William Pryor is only 56, although Trump has stated that he wants to have someone in there who will be there for the next 40-45 years. I haven’t heard of a 96-year-old SCOTUS Justice, so maybe not. But he is among the 6 front-runners.

Another potential Supreme Bureaucrat nominee, 53-year-old Brett Kavanaugh, has rubber-stamped Gitmo as legitimate and approves of “qualified immunity” claims by cops. Based on just those issues, let’s hope it’s not Kavanaugh.

In fact, Roger Stone thinks that Trump may very well pick Judge Andrew Napolitano for SCOTUS. However, given how anti-immigration and anti-foreigner the national socialist Donald Trump is, how anti-freedom and anti-private property Trump is, and how lacking in any understanding of moral scruples and basic decency Trump is, chances are that he’s going to go with whichever authoritarian statist the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society will tell him to pick.

Published inUncategorized