The radical ideology of this Trump nominee makes even the most conservative SCOTUS justices uneasy

It's a nice government you have there. Would be a shame if someone breaks it.

IAN MILLHISER

OCT 10, 2017, 8:00 AM

Justice Don Willett is charming.

Best known outside legal circles for his Twitter feed, @JusticeWillett, the Texas Supreme Court justice — and now a Trump nominee to a federal appeals court — tweets largely apolitical commentary about Calvin and Hobbes, his children, and Oxford commas. Many of his tweets are genuinely hilarious, and Willett is equally disarming in person. When I met him a couple years ago at a gathering of the conservative Federalist Society, he was genial, thoughtful, and surprisingly familiar with my work. The man knows how to endear himself to people.

This would all be well and good, if not for one other factor. This charming, intelligent, knowledgeable man also wants to dismantle much of the last 80 years of American law.

In a 2015 opinion laden with libertarian tropes and selective history, Willett called upon his court to revive a defunct doctrine once used to strike down minimum wage laws and gut workers’ right to organize. It’s a doctrine that that three of the Supreme Court of the United States’ most conservative members recently called out as “discredited” and “unprincipled.”

The “Lochner Era”
There are a handful of past Supreme Court decisions that belong to the constitutional “anti-canon” — the pro-slavery decision in Dred Scott, the Court’s pro-segregation decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, a 1918 decision striking down child labor laws. These are the sort of cases that law students are taught never to cite favorably in a brief. When they do come up in litigation, it is typically because one party accuses the other of make an argument reminiscent of an anti-canonical case.

-snip-

“Don’t Thread on Me”

Patel is a tribute to the increasing sophistication of lawyers fighting to restore cases like Lochner. It involves both an exceptionally dumb law and a bevy of sympathetic plaintiffs. It’s the sort of case where you very much want the plaintiffs, who were represented by a law firm that specializes in Trojan Horse lawsuits seeking to launder radical legal doctrines through cases involving real injustice, to prevail even if they don’t have any good legal arguments. It’s the sort of case that tugs at the heart, and that shuts down the part of the brain that makes judges think through the implications of what they are signing onto.

-snip-

Justice Willett is many things. He is radical and deeply conservative. But he is also intelligent, charismatic, and skilled in the arts of persuasion. And he will probably soon be a federal appellate judge. His views can no longer be safely ignored.

https://thinkprogress.org/trumps-most-radical-nominee-since-neil-gorsuch-02d1bcabc8e0/


This individual is dangerous Trojan judge, the above article is a good read, the sexual predator trump through his lackeys are packing the courts with individuals that do not believe in certain rights of the General Welfare of the country or individual, based in the Constitution