Welcome to a discussion about the 5th Revolution in the US, which I’ve titled the “Revenge Revolution.” For more about the Revenge Revolution and the author, click “About the Author” tab.  Periodically I write a “sense check” about the status of the Revolution. The previous “sense check” was ENTRY #519. Yes, we are currently embroiled in the “Revenge Revolution.”

BEGIN ENTRY #525: Some decisions by SCOTUS make you wonder if a few justices need to visit a proctologist to have their head relocated to the correct part of their anatomy. Several examples of their legal trickery over the last decade or so.

1. Citizens’ United (2010) ruled that restricting the amount of campaign donations by corporations and other organizations violated First Amendment rights. The result has been considerable amounts of “dark money” flowing into elections. The consequences of the decision were not hard to imagine, yet SCOTUS ruled so anyway.
2. Dobbs decision, which essentially banned Federal law allowing abortions. Dobbs decision stated abortion laws should be enacted by individual states. What has emerged? An obvious byzantine set of state laws. As if the SCOTUS illogic were not enough, the case was taken by SCOTUS even though the plaintiffs had no standing. The justification for the suit was based on a hypothetical situation rather than actual events. More SCOTUS trickery.
3. Trump vs United States (2024) where SCOTUS ruled presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within their exclusive constitutional authority and presumptive immunity for all official acts. However, the ruling does not grant immunity for unofficial acts. Gee, justices, really hard to understand what the consequences of that decision might be.

The most recent SCOTUS hocus-pocus, or “where is your head?” decision, was a ruling made without any oral arguments, and no evidence presented by the Trump administration supporting their claims.

As the Trump administration is prone to do, they filed an emergency appeal to overturn a lower court’s ruling prohibiting implementation of the administration’s proposed actions.  How did SCOTUS respond? Ever mindful of how the Trump administration has strictly adhered to all laws, SCOTUS bowed to the self-proclaimed orange king and issued a ruling that effectively allows Trump, as commander-in-chief, to ban transgender people from military service.

The ruling deferred to Trump‘s authority as commander-in-chief to ban transgender personnel in the military, regardless of the person’s rank, years of service, and/or history of performance. Trump order stated all known transgender service personnel be dishonorably discharged, which, in turns, makes the person ineligible for any potential pension.

One person affected is a pilot with 19+ years of service and 50+ combat missions. The military has invested $20+ million in training the pilot. But in Trump world, expertise and experience do not matter. If the king, who never served one day in the military, doesn’t like you, then “you’re fired!” A dishonorable discharge and no pension despite your service record. So much for supporting duty, honor, country.

Aside from the lack of evidence by the Trump administration that transgender personnel have underperformed or transgender personnel negatively affect morale of the unit, out they go. Where this leads is again not hard to predict.  What’s equally disturbing, I have not heard the likely consequences discussed in the media. And, as usual, Republicans in the House and Senate remain silent, shaking in their booties.  

What’s the risk of the SCOTUS decision to allow the president to basically decide who can serve in the military?  Given Trump’s demonstrated proclivity for stretching every ruling to the limit, and then often ignoring the law, it is not hard to imagine Trump, or his Secretary of Defense lackey, will declare that those considered unfit for military service now include blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Asians, etc. Anyone who is not a religious fundamentalist with western European heritage is not fit to serve. 

The SCOTUS ruling does not prevent transgender personnel dishonorably discharged from suing to get their jobs back.  Duh, SCOTUS, did you think through this decision? How do those discharged get their jobs back and/or retain their pension rights?

While the courts are technically available to those personnel, what is the cost and what are the consequences of the time lag between filing a suit and the eventual outcome? Law firms which have not capitulated and decided to stand up to Trump are already overloaded with pro bono work trying to help many high profile, highly educated people arbitrarily discharged or dismissed by the DOGE boys.

The pilot is high profile and might be an exception and probably could get pro bono representation from a top-notch law firm. But what about the other personnel? What is the staff sergeant going to do? If the personnel are able to sue, the Federal government will appeal any unfavorable ruling all the way to SCOTUS. Even with a favorable SCOTUS decision, the time lag will be ~3 years. The plaintiff will have taken another job, and the former military unit moved on. Those discharged have few real options for restitution.   

What’s the solution to a SCOTUS that has repeatedly been unable to consider consequences of their decisions?  Some of the likely consequences are so basic you’d think that even Thomas and Alito would be concerned about the decision. But apparently not.

The solution is the same that’s required to stop Trump‘s effort to destroy democracy and form a dictatorship. The solution is a revolution, and one that more and more seems likely to become a shooting revolution with possible assassinations of Trump and key enablers. SCOTUS’ ineptness aside, the real cause is Trump.  

If you think such events are unlikely, consider all the highly trained military like personnel who have been terminated and are extremely upset. People with military combat training, and especially those having served in special forces, know how to circumvent many “protections” surrounding the president and key agency personnel. Another option is a squadron of drones that attack during one of the president’s frequent golf games.

Want more ammunition, as it were, about how alienated groups might take revenge? SCOTUS agreed to hear arguments this term about whether the 14^th Amendment grants citizenship to anyone born in the US. Trump, the Constitutional scholar, says the 14^th Amendment does not apply to non-citizen mothers. Mmm, does that mean a couple of Trump’s children are not US citizens since the mother was not a citizen when they were born?  Stay tuned. 

By the way, have a nice day, Mrs. Lincoln. Hope you enjoyed the play.   END #525

Other Topics. Interested in more info about climate change, what’s required to electrify a fleet of cars/trucks, and an array of other topics, visit another page of this website, https://usrevolution5.com/jrd-thought-comments/