.
ER Editor: More in the German Drama Stakes. An AfD ban is not legally probable/possible, as other reports have noted, yet it’s a recurring theme that keeps the flames of tension stoked to wake up a sleeping population. An overreaching, globalist-left judiciary that doesn’t serve the people is another theme that keeps getting played out (see Trump’s recent victory over this in the US), while calling the populist right ‘fascist’. Call us cynical.
The French Constitutional Court has been played with in a similar manner.
What struck us was how much this new appointment to Germany’s Constitutional Court, a real Karen if ever there was one, resembles (sort of) Alice Weidel, albeit less blond. Odd.
Episode 35. Which makes us feel less like an actual news site and more of a Theatre Reporting site because, let’s face it, what else is there right now?
This lady is getting some pushback on Twitter/X.
#Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf
********
AfD ban leaps closer with likely election of new far-left judge to Germany’s top court
The right’s nightmare could come true with a new top judge who wants to ban the AfD, supports gendered language in the constitution, and backed mandatory Covid-19 vaccines. (Theatre)
REMIX NEWS
Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, a lawyer described as far-left, is poised to become a new judge at the Federal Constitutional Court, Germany’s top court, and it is very bad news for Germany’s conservatives.
This new development could significantly increase the chances that a ban on the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party actually passes through the court.
The governing coalition, the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Christian Democrats (CDU), has agreed on the SPD candidate, who has gained public attention for her strong opinions. The news comes after the SPD voted on an AfD ban in a unanimous motion at the end of their three-day party congress last week.
Brosius-Gersdorf is on record that she wants a ban on the AfD, saying: “We are a resilient democracy. We have safeguards against anti-constitutional parties.” (ER: Irony alert.)
A year ago, on the ZDF talk show “Markus Lanz” on July 25, 2024, Brosius-Gersdorf controversially expressed regret that an AfD ban “would not eliminate its supporters.”
When Lanz, puzzled, asked, “You don’t want to eliminate people?”, she replied, “Of course not.” However, she insisted on the possibility of depriving AfD members of their basic rights, including the right to be elected, stating, “We have the ability to deprive individuals of their basic rights.”
Following her expected appointment to Karlsruhe, where the Constitutional Court is headquartered, Brosius-Gersdorf is also considered a frontrunner for the position of President of the Federal Constitutional Court. That means the court, made up of 16 judges, would be led by the far-left judge, which could prove catastrophic for not only the AfD, but also present a major problem for libertarians, supporters of free speech, and social conservatives.
Governments come and go, but Brosius-Gersdorf will be in her position for a very long time, and she will wield enormous power.
Beyond her stance on the AfD, she was a strong advocate for mandatory Covid-19 vaccination, arguing in 2021 that the German constitution, the Basic Law, already suggested that this would be a necessity. She wrote, “One can even consider whether there is now a constitutional obligation to introduce mandatory vaccination.” Furthermore, she stated, “It is the state’s responsibility to effectively protect the vast majority of the population, who have been voluntarily vaccinated, from their health (…) continuing to be threatened by the unvaccinated.”
Notably, it turned out that vaccination did not stop the spread of the illness, a contention by numerous health authorities that turned out to be absolutely false.
Her statements about mandatory vaccination have already led CDU Bundestag member Saskia Ludwig to declare Brosius-Gersdorf “unelectable” on Tuesday.
Translation: Unacceptable! Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf: “It is the state’s responsibility to effectively protect the vast majority of the population, who are voluntarily vaccinated, from having their health…continually threatened by the unvaccinated.”
There are other areas where Brosius-Gersdorf could prove a bane to conservatives and the right in Germany, including on social issues.
The designated constitutional judge has also called for the German Basic Law to adopt “gender-appropriate” language, as reported by German media outlet Apollo News. She argued that the generic masculine, as standard language, leads to “a conceptual underrepresentation of women,” and that the state is obligated to “choose a form of expression that does justice to the fundamental rights of women and persons of diverse genders, as well as to the constitution.”
This has to do with the German language, which has masculine and feminine words, and in many cases, there is an emphasis on the masculine form, which many German feminists reject as outdated.
It remains unclear why the CDU would back this candidate. (ER: Yes, it’s hard to find logic in any of this.) Following protests from the SPD and the Greens, the CDU/CSU withdrew their nomination of conservative Federal Administrative Court judge Robert Seegmüller for the Federal Constitutional Court. They are now putting forward Federal Labor Court judge Günter Spinner. The SPD is also nominating Munich professor Ann-Katrin Kaufhold. For these candidates to be elected, the coalition factions, the SPD and the CDU/CSU, require a two-thirds majority, meaning the Greens and the Left Party must also agree.
Brosius-Gersdorf represents a serious obstacle to not only the AfD, but also the CDU on a range of issues. The CDU, for instance, has taken issue with gendered language, which is a hot cultural topic in Germany. If the CDU backs this candidate, it is likely to pay the price for years to come.
Before any potential AfD ban, the Bundestag must first vote to pass a ban proposal. So far, the CDU has rejected such a ban, with Chancellor Merz stating that it reeked of eliminating a political rival. Other top CDU officials have rejected a ban. However, if the CDU comes around to the idea, the Constitutional Court may be much more willing to pass such a ban under the potential leadership of Brosius-Gersdorf.
CONTINUE READING HERE
************
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply