We know that politicians are partisan driven. When you vote for a candidate you generally know their ideology. In fact, both parties are so entrenched in their beliefs that the current congress is not able to function. It should not operate that way at the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS). While they are nominated by the president and confirmed by congress, they are given a lifetime appointment which should allow them to vote based on the law and not ideology. During the 60′s we had some great justices. Justice Earl Warren, Thurgood Marshall, Wiliam Brennen, and Potter Stewart helped strengthen the Bill of Rights. The Warren Court ended racial segregation. The court decided landmark cases involving racial segregation, voting and redistricting, criminal procedure, and free speech. Today’s supreme court pales in comparison. The conservative justices do not apply the constitution as intended and allow their ideology to trump fairness and the Constitution. In my lifetime it is by far the worst court I have seen, most likely due to the fact it’s filled with intellectually challenged misguided misfits. Their decisions are torn straight from the GOP playbook.
The decisions of the court are often 5 to 4 with the five conservative justices voting the Republican Party line. They are Chief Justice John Roberts and justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Anthony Kennedy.
John Roberts has wanted to gut the Voting Rights Act for 30 years. Now he has had the chance and he took advantage of it. Roberts seems to believe racism in America is over and thus protecting voting rights for African Americans is not necessary. However within 24 hours of the decision to emasculate the Voting Rights Act, 24 states passed new voting regulations to curb the votes of African Americans, the elderly, and college students. If Roberts thinks racism is a thing of the past, how does he explain people like Cliven Bundy, Donald Sterling, Ted Nugent, Paula Deen, and Phil Robertson. Just go to a Tea Party rally and count the number of overtly racist placards you see.
Legalistically, Samuel Alito may be the worse jurist. Here is a quote from Reed Richardson in The Nation.
Since his confirmation more than seven years ago, Alito has quickly become a sort of liberal’s worst-case scenario for the Court’s future, one where civil liberties are routinely circumscribed, women’s reproductive rights are rolled back, and corporations are consistently emboldened. Sadly, the press should have seen this coming. Alito’s judicial record prior to being nominated was rife with examples of nakedly aggressive rulings—many of which were later overturned—in service of the powerful over the powerless.
Given his history, it’s obvious why he voted for Citizens United.
Antonin Scalia made one of the biggest mistakes a member of the Supreme Court has authored. In a dissent to the recent decision to uphold the EPA’s right to regulate coal pollution Scalia cited a 2001 case, but completely reversed the position of the EPA. University of California-Berkeley law professor Dan Farber, said it was “embarrassing” and a “cringeworthy blunder.” Scalia also believes the Devil is a physical being. Moreover, Scalia attended a political retreat by the Koch brothers. Many felt that his friendship with the Koch’s should have caused him to disqualify himself from the Citizen’s United case. Justice Clarence Thomas attended the same event.
Justice Thomas is quiet and gives very little away. Of course that was not the case when he supervised Anita Hill at the Department of Education. According to Hill,
He spoke about…such matters as women having sex with animals and films showing group sex or rape scenes” she said, adding that on several occasions Thomas graphically described “his own sexual prowess” and the details of his anatomy.Hill also recounted an instance in which Thomas examined a can of Coke on his desk and asked, “Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?
Thomas seems to follow whatever Antonin Scalia does. Thomas had only been a judge for one year when he was named to the court and I believe he is scared shitless. If he always agrees with the conservative Scalia, no one on the right will question his judgement.
Anthony Kennedy is the one conservative justice who seems to decide cases individually and not by an entrenched ideology. Still, he can sometimes join the other conservatives justices in their obtuse rendering of the constitution.
As for recent SCOTUS decisions, three stand out as particularly egregious. They are Citizen’s United, the changes made in the Voting Rights Act, and the Hobby Lobby case. All received the votes of the five justices above.
The one horrible decision that has affected America the most is the Citizen’s United case. This may be the most gratuitous decision SCOTUS has ever made. It is a complete testament to the “let’s give the rich control over politics” so the money can trickle down to the middle class and poor. Do you really believe these greedy bastards are going to let anything of value trickle down?
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission allowed corporations to spend as much money as they wanted on political campaigns which led to the creation of super PAC’s. This meant more control by the corporate robber baron’s over who gets elected and less control for ordinary people. This furthered the idea that corporations are people. If they are people doesn’t the Constitution say “one person, one vote?” Evidently the five conservative justices are blind to the fact that money means votes and thus corporations and the rich have more power than one person’s vote. In addition, the law allows that contributor’s to the super PAC’s can remain anonymous. So voters have little knowledge about who is funding a particular candidate. These five justices are in fact acting as mere puppets for the rich and powerful in America.
The Voting Rights Act has worked well since its passage in 1965. Only an idiot would allow a law to be changed that has been working for that long. Still, that is what the conservative justices did. As stated earlier, despite all evidence to the contrary, Chief Justice John Roberts believes racism is a remnant of the past. The decision puts progress made by African Americans in perilous danger, but it does satisfy the Supreme Court’s massa’s who never have been held in high regard by person’s of color anyway.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby allowed a corporation to forgo paying insurance for an employee’s birth control as mandated by the Affordable Care Act. The corporation may forgo coverage if they feel that certain contraceptive devices violate their religious beliefs. The motive behind the case is rather disingenuous. I believe this has more to do with a conservative attempt to erode the Affordable Care Act, than a sincere case of someone’s religious rights being violated. The best argument I’ve heard against the decision comes from former Star Trek star and liberal activist George Takei.
The ruling elevates the rights of a FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION over those of its women employees and opens the door to all manner of claims that a company can refuse services based on its owner’s religion. Think about the ramifications: As Justice Ginsberg’s stinging dissent pointed out, companies run by Scientologists could refuse to cover antidepressants, and those run by Jews or Hindus could refuse to cover medications derived from pigs. One wonders, whether the case would have come out differently if a Muslim-run chain business attempted to impose Sharia law on its employees.
Both sides of the aisle condemn active judges. I always thought an activist judge was one that did not agree with your opinion. However, I believe the decisions recently rendered by SCOTUS will lead to voter suppression, corporate malfeasance, and discrimination against women. They are in fact, an example of activist judges following conservative ideals at the expense of others. It is more important than ever that we elect a Democrat as president in 2016 to bring sanity back to the Supreme Court.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
http://www.motherjones.com/...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/...
http://www.patheos.com/...
http://www.nytimes.com/...
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
http://www.urbandictionary.com/...
http://www.rawstory.com/...