Finance case renews focus on precedent - Roberts, Alito Pledged Deference; Activists After All?

[usregimechange]

WASHINGTON - When Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. successfully navigated their Senate confirmation hearings, both promised to show deference to U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

Now, following oral arguments last week in a major campaign finance case, it appears they will vote to overturn two prior Supreme Court cases, a move that critics say shows that their adherence to a modest judicial philosophy is patchy at best.

But a close reading of the confirmation hearing transcripts shows that Roberts and Alito, who were both nominated by George W. Bush in 2005, left themselves plenty of wiggle room when it comes to re-appraising old cases they disagree with.

Although both said they would respect stare decisis, the legal concept of respecting the authority of prior court decisions, neither said justices should always follow Supreme Court precedent.

Their comments could help justify their actions if, as most observers predict, the court strikes down restrictions on independent corporate-funded speech prior to federal elections. Citizens United v. FEC, 08-205.

To reach that goal, the court would have to overrule two prior Supreme Court cases that gave the court's blessing to restrictions on corporate spending: Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, 496 U.S. 652 (1990) and McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93 (2003).

http://pda-appellateblog.blogspot.com/2009_09_01_archive.html#1495937048976957456


How many naive Senators uncritically accepted supporters of Alito and Robert's cynical pretend opposition to judicial activism?

[DavidDvorkin]

1. So let's impeach and remove them

I know it won't happen, but I can dream.