Sen. Whitehouse: There's a 'Crisis of Credibility' at the U.S. Supreme Court
Sen. Whitehouse: There's a 'Crisis of Credibility' at the U.S. Supreme Court
The Roberts Court has shown an "undeniable pattern of political allegiance," the U.S. senator from Rhode Island says.
By Sheldon Whitehouse | February 15, 2019 at 02:50 PM
“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” Chief Justice John Roberts declared last fall in response to President Trump’s jab at an “Obama judge.” In spite of my distaste for Trump’s attacks on our judiciary, on this one, the facts are with Trump.
As a former U.S. attorney and state attorney general, I have spent my share of time in the courtroom before state and federal judges whose commitment to neutral principles and fairness made even losing parties respect their decisions. Today, that confidence is undermined by the Roberts Court’s undeniable pattern of political allegiance. Under Roberts, justices appointed by Republican presidents have, with remarkable consistency, delivered rulings that advantage big corporate and special interests that are, in turn, the political lifeblood of the Republican Party. The “Roberts Five” are causing a crisis of credibility that is rippling through the entire judiciary.
Several decisions have been particularly flagrant and notorious: Citizens United v. FEC wrongly held that unlimited special-interest spending couldn’t corrupt, or even appear to corrupt, American politics, unleashing torrents of corruption and public disdain. Shelby County v. Holder wrongly declared racism over, disabling key sections of the Voting Rights Act and prompting a surge of racist state voting legislation. District of Columbia v. Heller elevated as constitutional doctrine a Second Amendment argument once described by a former chief justice as a “fraud.” After a bald invitation from a Republican appointee, right-wing lawyers rushed to lose cases in lower courts so a friendly Supreme Court majority could deliver a blow to the labor movement in Janus v. AFSCME.
Dig a bit, and a pattern emerges far worse than just that handful of bad decisions. Since Roberts ascended to chief justice in 2006, the court’s bare 5-4 majority of Republican appointees has delivered such rulings not three or four times, not even a dozen or two dozen times, but 73 times in civil cases. There are 79 5-4 decisions with no Democratic appointee joining the majority since Roberts became chief justice; and 73 of them implicate issues important to powerful Republican political interests. The score in those 73 cases for the big Republican interests is 73-0. On this Republican judicial romp, the Roberts Five have been cavalier with any doctrine, precedent or congressional finding that gets in their way.
The 73 decisions fall into four categories: First are decisions to help the Republican Party and its donors in politics, suppressing votes, buying influence, sowing fear, and gerrymandering. Second are decisions that make it harder for regulators and juries to hold corporations accountable. Powerful interests muscle their way around Congress; they hate uncaptured government regulators and courtrooms where they have to be equal before the law. Third are decisions to restrict civil rights and condone discrimination, reflecting the worldview that corporations know best, that courts have no business remedying historical discrimination and that views and experiences outside the white, male, Christian mainstream of the Republican Party merit lower legal standing. Fourth are decisions that have given straight-up political victories to the right-wing base on issues like abortion, guns and religion—achieving by judicial fiat what Republicans couldn’t accomplish through the legislative process.
The court’s so-called conservatives often abandon conservative judicial principles to reach the desired outcome. Republican appointees routinely assure senators at their confirmation hearings that they will simply “call balls and strikes,” and “follow the law of judicial precedent.” Yet doctrines about modesty, stare decisis and respect for the judgment of elected majorities evaporate in these cases. Even the pet doctrine of originalism is ignored when inconvenient. These decisions are only conservative in that they benefit powerful conservative interests.
more...
https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2019/02/15/sen-whitehouse-theres-a-crisis-of-credibility-at-the-u-s-supreme-court/?fbclid=IwAR3AZEfLaKEAcRn0wPSTOZSP7r7mJ20gSoEis65xr1lUe-A54toqS_fBj8Y&slreturn=20190120080941
= new reply since forum marked as read
he's my Senator, he is exceptionally intelligent, and is an advocate for Climate change.
Sometimes being a Senator is more gratifying than being President.
It's happening here, Australia, the UK and others. Bit by bit invisible plutocrats are buying remnants of democracy world-wide and shredding our social fabric because they believe their wealth gives them the right to control everything. They have zero moral authority, but only monetary authority - a shift put into high gear by Citizens United, America's enamoration with consumerism and a new-found worship of a very evil Wall Street.
Many of us saw this cancer on our society metastasize with the dogma of Spiro Agnew, the false populism of Reagan and Republican co-opting of a sector of our churches. Those things shook me to my core but I felt our system of checks and balances would eventually counter-weigh those trends. I've been proven wrong.
We've lost most of our hard-earned old-fashioned common sense and humility gained from two world wars and the Great Depression. Now, we're to a point where too many Americans believe it's perfectly OK for politicians be plutocrats, to lie with every breath and that Trump surely is Jesus' long-lost secret brother.
I'm forever grateful for our Democratic politicians that still are public servants rather than servants of the wealthy. I feel very positive short-term by quite negative long-term.
Enough old-man rant for a cold, rainy Wednesday.....
I've given up on understanding it, but honestly feel UK leave-side citizens were conned into that vote by Cameron's plutocrats. Seems to me a long period of factual public education on the topic was in order prior to a vote of that extreme importance.
Unfortunately, the cat's out of the bag and whatever your outcome turns out to be, we all hope you folks recover quickly. You're long overdue a break from Thatcherism and extreme austerity!
...........
...........
