Sen. Eric Schmitt on his new book, "The Last Line of Defense: How to Beat the Left in Court"
Title: The Last Line of Defense: How to Beat the Left in CourtIn an episode of *The Takeout*, U.S. Senator Eric Schmitt, a former presidential candidate known for his role in "Slap-Shot," joined CBS News' "The Takeout" show. This new season focused on political dynamics, where Trump and his allies have been seen as more protective of their interests than the majority of judges. Schmitt took this cue to address a book he wrote titled *The Last Line of Defense: How to Beat the Left in Court*.
Schmitt's Background and Introduction
Schmitt, a senior U.S. senator, has become involved with his political career as an advocate for judicial fairness. His new book challenges the notion that judges should support their party at all costs. The title *The Last Line of Defense* suggests that judges often act to protect party interests, which Schmitt argues is unnecessary and harmful.
Book Title and Content
"The Last Line of Defense" delves into the complexities of judicial decisions, particularly how judges can align with either a majority or minority group. Schmitt advocates for fair courts where judges are independent, following due process, and balancing competing interests to reflect the diversity of the court's tapestry.
Response to Trump's views
In CBS's context, Schmitt joined a discussion about judicial decisions with Trump and his allies. The discussion likely centered on how these judges could support Trump while allowing minority cases. Schmitt argued that this was detrimental and that fair courts should instead listen to the people, not those who aligned with him.
Key Arguments and Examples
Schmitt's arguments include:
1. Majority Judges: He emphasizes the role of majority judges in upholding judicial integrity and public trust.
2. Minority Cases: He highlights how some cases involve minority interests that warrant separate review.
3. Judicial Independence: The idea is to ensure judges exercise their power independently, regardless of party membership.
Conclusion
Schmitt's book reflects a commitment to fair judiciary, where judges are independent and reflect the composition of the court. His perspective aligns with a desire for judicial fairness that transcends partisanship, as he argues against biased judges who support political candidates. This approach is expected to resonate with discussions in "The Takeout," which likely included an exchange with Trump and his allies.
------
