The passing of the late Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg shocked the nation and threw the 2020 election into turmoil.
Our President faces an important decision -- maybe the most important of his career. The path he chooses could have consequences for generations to come.
- Should he immediately nominate a replacement and push to confirm before the election?
- Should he nominate a replacement, but not push to confirm before the election?
- Or, should he hold his nomination and promise to move forward with RBG’s replacement the first day of his second term?
(If you have thoughts on this question, take our poll and let us know!)
There's no question that the President's decision could swing the balance of power in the Supreme Court in a decidedly conservative direction.
Right now, the court is evenly split along ideological lines with Chief Justice John Roberts as the swing vote. If the President can appoint and the Senate can approve another staunch conservative, the court will have a clear bent towards originalism and responsible constitutional jurisprudence.
Any liberty-loving American would agree that such an appointment would be a good thing for our country.
And yet, even if the court swings to the right, the American people will still be left powerless in the face of the Court's decisions. The Supreme Court will still have the authority to dictate policy for the entire country, as they've done in case after case over the last few decades.
There's no guarantee that Trump's appointment will hold to his or her conservative values. Plus, the Democrats in the Senate are threatening to pack the court and shift the balance of power back to the left.
President Trump's appointment would be a good thing, but we need a more permanent solution to federal overreach from the Supreme Court.
That's why the Framers included the Convention of States option in the Constitution.
The Framers predicted that the federal government would one day exceed the limits of its authority. They knew that power corrupts and that even the most apolitical branch (the courts) could abuse their power and become tyrannical.
So, they allowed the states to propose constitutional amendments via the process outlined in Article V.
Article V allows the states to call a Convention of States for the purpose of proposing constitutional amendments that limit the power, scope, and jurisdiction of the federal government. These amendments can limit all three branches of government -- including the Supreme Court -- by shrinking federal jurisdiction and giving the states real recourse to override overreaching court decisions.
We encourage the President and the Senate to appoint an originalist who respects the Framers' vision for the Constitution. But we should also use the tools those Framers gave us to restore the balance of power between the federal and state governments, and return ultimate power where it belongs: with We the People.
Sign the Convention of States Petition below to join the movement!
