Replacing Justice Roberts With Judge Napolitano

Napolitano in Place of Roberts

I would want Chief Justice Roberts to retire. As Shapiro (2014) notes, he was the Justice who "changed the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate into a tax and thus rescued President Obama's signature legislation." For this reason alone I would want him to retire. The ACA has done nothing but benefit the health care cartel and I would want a Justice on the Supreme Court who recognizes that and would not invent ludicrous ways to re-interpret legislation that would not actually benefit the people of the U.S. but rather the cartels that are bleeding individuals dry with outrageous premiums and prices for health care. I would want a judge who was honest and fair and understood the Constitution.

For that reason, I would nominate Judge Andrew Napolitano. He understands what truth and honesty are and I always appreciate his candor and perspective on issues that affect us in today's world. He also understands corruption when he sees it and perfect example of this is the case against Hillary Clinton, which Napolitano identifies as "overwhelming, damning and, from her perspective, grave" (Heine, 2016). Not only does Napolitano know how to interpret the law and apply it accordingly, he is not beholden to any of the corporatist political elite establishment (like the Clintons and much of Congress). He is the former Judge of the New Jersey Superior Court (1987-1995) and espouses libertarian principles. He is also a Roman Catholic like Justice Roberts, although when it comes to using reason instead of obfuscation and upholding the principles of a Catholic worldview, Napolitano is far more admirable than Roberts, who bends like a reed in the wind.

Since his time as a Judge in New Jersey, Napolitano has served as a media analyst on Fox, giving coherent and critical assessments of party politics. He has a better grasp on the economic pitfalls surrounding the Keynesian economy today and he defends the Constitution with all his heart -- something we need on the Supreme Court, as those who are there seem to think little of shredding it or of re-interpreting it so as to be able to benefit and do the bidding of the corporatist cartels that run America.

He is pro-life which is something I agree with, although I believe that, along with Ron Paul, it should be a states' right issue (simply because it is not something the federal government should be policing: the less the laws the better). Napolitano would agree with this sentiment, espousing libertarian principles as he does. He also has enough sense to not support these wasteful wars in the Middle East that simply add to the tension and chaos that already exists in the world, what with the U.S.'s support of so-called "moderate" rebels aka terrorists in Syria and elsewhere in its never-ending game of regime change around the world, as it tries to install puppets that will do the bidding of the business and Zionist cartels in the U.S.