In a recently published article on this page, I wrote about Warren’s economic radicalism. In an explosive piece appearing in Politico today, Rich Lowry—who, I must add, is no uncritical admirer of President Trump—has carefully exposed Warren’s constitutional radicalism and potential threat to the constitution.
“Should the Massachusetts senator become president of the United States,” writes Lowry, “she will undertake a historic bout of federal activism unmoored from any serious consideration of constitutional constraints.
“In contrast to Trump’s carelessness and highly personalized view of the presidency, Warren offers a carefully thought-out agenda of open contempt for legal and constitutional boundaries. It’s not that she, a former Harvard Law professor, doesn’t know that they exist; it’s that she doesn’t care.”
Lowry notes that her views have raised eyebrows even among some liberals–sadly not enough of them–in the liberal establishment at CNN:
“To their credit, a couple of CNN panelists pressed her in July on the constitutional basis of her wealth tax, and she just waved them off. Her answer came down to the assertion that if a majority supports the tax, it should pass muster. Needless to say, the op-ed pages and airwaves weren’t thick with denunciations of her casual dismissal of the Constitution.”
What? If the majority supports what she wants to do—even if it means defying the constitution, “it should pass muster”?
Chavez used a referendum to change the constitution of Venezuela to legitimize his draconian and socialist measures.
I agree with Mr. Lowry that there would be a serious cause for concern should Elizabeth Warren be elected president of the United States.