Dems' Attempt to Remake SCOTUS a Futile 'Hail Mary'

An Idaho couple’s 15-year nightmare with the federal government is finally over, thanks to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling yesterday.

And it’s one more reason Democrats are engaged in a desperate effort to remake the high court.

Michael and Chantell Sackett purchased an empty lot located 300 feet from Priest Lake, and began clearing it to build their dream home. When they began filling the property’s so-called “wetlands,” the Environmental Protection Agency gave them a cease work order.

The agency claimed that backfilling the property with sand and gravel constituted polluting “navigable waters,” a violation of the Clean Waters Act.

The EPA argued that the wetlands on the Sacketts’ property fed into a non-navigable creek, which in turn emptied into Priest Lake.

All nine justices agreed that the EPA had overstepped its authority — even using the agency’s own reasoning. However, a majority of five justices believed the EPA’s reasoning was overly broad.

Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the majority, stated that the CWA only regulates wetlands that have a "continuous surface connection" to navigable bodies of waters.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-NY, was hysterical, claiming that “This MAGA Supreme Court is continuing to erode our country’s environmental laws.”

He added, “Make no mistake — this ruling will mean more polluted water, and more destruction of wetlands. We’ll keep fighting to protect our waters.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse suggested dark money was at play.

“Polluters paid for this Court,” the Rhode Island Democrat tweeted. “This is part of their reward.”

Others suggested that the justices “gutted the Clean Water Act,” were paid off, and that the court had “ripped the heart out of the law.” The consensus was that the Supreme Court is an “Illegitimate court.”

Democrats have placed the court squarely in their crosshairs ever since its shift to the right following the appointment of three conservative justices by former President Donald Trump.

And their efforts to swing the high court back to being the activist, liberal body it once was are not merely desperate — they’re also futile.

Lawyer, businessman, and Republican strategist Ford O’Conner noted that this is because Democrats see the court as an impediment to achieving total government control.

“Democrats find the Roberts court and the Supreme Court in general as hostile to their quest for uni-party power,” he told Newsmax. “They see it as the primary obstacle to being able to run roughshod over the laws of this country. It’s the only obstacle to achieving pseudo-Marxism.”

And the general public’s unfamiliarity with the high court’s inner workings only helps Democrats.

“They’re aware of the fact that most Americans don’t recognize that the Supreme Court is the most influential branch in terms of the daily lives of Americans. And they have a concerted effort to drive down the impact of the Supreme Court.”

Think of the court as a traffic cop over the actions of the other two branches, telling them that this law or that executive order is constitutional, whereas another is not.

Complaints over the court came to a head last year with its decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which struck down the nearly 50-year reign of Roe v. Wade, and made abortion a state issue.

O’Connell explained that “their first quest was to stack the court. When they found that there was no appetite” for that, “they changed gears to try to smear the court — particularly its conservative justices.” Clarence Thomas has been particularly targeted.

The Court has also been hit with veiled threats.

For example, Sen. Chris Murphy appeared on NBC News’ “Face the Nation” earlier this month and told host Chuck Todd that a revolt would result if the court doesn’t approve future gun regulation.

“If the Supreme Court eventually says states or Congress can’t pass universal background checks or can’t take these assault weapons off the streets … there’s going to be a popular revolt over that policy, the Connecticut Democrat said. “A court that’s already pretty illegitimate is going to be in full crisis mode.”

O’Connell concluded that “their sole goal is to diminish trust in the United States Supreme Court … which they see as their biggest obstacle to their power grab of the federal institutions of this country.”

But that’s not likely to happen. In fact, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who announced his candidacy for the GOP presidential nomination Wednesday, saw a pathway to actually increase its conservative sway from nominally 6-3 to 7-2.

He reasoned that if a Republican were to serve eight years after the 2024 election, four justices would likely retire: two strong conservatives, one nominally conservative, and a liberal.

If it pans out, Democrats should just cool their jets, sit back, and enjoy the ride — a ride to a place called freedom.