Under the Constitution, “the President is invested with certain important political powers, in the exercise of which he is to use his own discretion.” For his decisions, “he is accountable only to his country in his political character, and to his own conscience.” His choices cannot be questioned in court because “the subjects are political. They respect the nation, not individual rights, and being entrusted to the executive, the decision of the executive is conclusive.”

Who penned these outrageous words? Democrats and many pundits might answer Vice President J.D. Vance. Over the weekend, Vance provoked an onslaught of criticism for suggesting that federal district judges “aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”

But the usual suspects would be wrong. The right answer is John Marshall, the greatest chief justice in Supreme Court history. And he did not squirrel this view away in a private journal. Instead, Marshall publicly explained that courts could not review presidential decisions on “political” subjects “entrusted to the executive” in a Supreme Court opinion.

He announced this principle not just in any case, but in Marbury v. Madison, the greatest opinion in Supreme Court history. The very same Marbury that concluded that federal judges should reject unconstitutional statutes, also recognized that courts could not intrude into the president’s exercise of his constitutional — dare we say “legitimate” — powers. Marshall’s opinion has given rise to the “political question doctrine,” which prohibits courts from reviewing decisions vested in the Constitution in the other branches, such as making war, prosecuting cases, and conducting impeachments.

Nevertheless, Democrats and pundits have exaggerated Vance’s remarks into a “constitutional crisis.” They claim that the Trump administration is threatening to defy court orders before overthrowing the constitutional structure, governing by presidential decree, and ruling without regard to the law. To be sure, all of us ought by now to be accustomed to such bizarre and overwrought reactions from Trump’s and Vance’s critics — and to write them off. Marshall himself would have seen these claims as a deliberate misrepresentation of the separation of powers. Americans should today as well. (Read more from “Trump And Vance Aren’t Defying The Constitution, They’re Following It” HERE)

Republican senators are urging some of their colleagues, including Vice President-elect JD Vance, R-Ohio, and Donald Trump’s Secretary of State pick Marco Rubio, R-Florida, to get back to the office and block Democrats from confirming judges during the lame-duck session while they still have the majority and the White House.

After their absences helped Senate Democrats to confirm several of President Joe Biden’s nominees, Republicans fumed about Vance, Rubio and others during their weekly caucus lunch and to reporters. “I’m not going to bubble wrap it,” said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La. “There’s no excuse for that, it’s our job to be here and vote.”

“We want to see [Vance] and some of our members back because of these votes we’re having,” Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., told reporters. “Particularly on some of the circuit court judges.”

Trump himself issued marching orders on Truth Social on Tuesday. “The Democrats are trying to stack the Courts with Radical Left Judges on their way out the door,” Trump declared. “Republican Senators need to Show Up and Hold the Line — No more Judges confirmed before Inauguration Day!” he wrote, just a few hours after he invited several GOP senators, including Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, to witness a SpaceX launch while the rest of the chamber was voting. (Read more from “No Excuse”: Trump Fumes on Truth Social After Senate Confirms Biden Judges — Thanks to GOP Absences” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr