by Mitch Kokai
Senior Political Analyst, John Locke Foundation
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) unwittingly made a compelling case this week why voters should not elect a Democrat to the White House again.
Responding to tweets from Elon Musk, owner of X, formerly known as Twitter, complaining about “the disaster that is downtown” San Francisco, Newsom admitted that Musk “has touched on a key issue” and touted the $15.3 billion California has spent on the problem. Then Newsom tried to shift blame to “federal courts” that have blocked “local efforts to clear street encampments.”
“Courts must also be held accountable,” Newsom went on. “Enough is enough.”
It is true that federal courts have made it harder for San Francisco and every other city and state covered by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (including Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington) to maintain public health and safety. …
… The only way to hold the judiciary accountable is to vote for the presidential candidates of the party that rejects the activist judicial philosophy of judges making bad rulings.
Guess which party appointed every judge responsible for Martin v. Boise and every subsequent appeals decision upholding its ruling? Yes, the Democratic Party.
Of the three judges who heard Martin v. Boise, two were appointed by President Bill Clinton and the third by Barack Obama. When the city of Grants Pass, Oregon, challenged Martin v. Boise this year, the two judges who ruled for the homeless were appointed by Clinton. The lone dissent was written by a nominee of President Donald Trump.
San Francisco’s homeless problem was not created entirely by Democratic judges — Newsom has made plenty of policy errors of his own — but to the extent that federal courts have been a hindrance and not a help, the Democratic Party is wholly to blame.