The Importance of a Democrat in the White House...

On July 23, 2016, we discontinued our forums. We ask our members to please join us in our new community site, The Hartmann Report. Please note that you will have to register a new account on The Hartmann Report.

6 posts / 0 new

According to the New York Times, based on an analysis of four sets of political science data, now after five terms, Chief Justice John Roberts’ Supreme Court is “the most conservative one in living memory.” During this time, the Roberts court “issued conservative decisions 58 percent of the time" and, in the last year, that rate increased to 65 percent, the highest since 1953. As Jeffrey Toobin noted last year in an article for The New Yorker, "In every major case since he became the nation’s seventeenth Chief Justice, Roberts has sided with the prosecution over the defendant, the state over the condemned, the executive branch over the legislative, and the corporate defendant over the individual plaintiff. Even more than Scalia, who has embodied judicial conservatism during a generation of service on the Supreme Court, Roberts has served the interests, and reflected the values, of the contemporary Republican Party." And now with the additional appointment of Alito, Bush moved the Supreme Court so far to the right that some are wondering when they're going to repeal the minimum wage and child labor laws, as the last uber-conservative court did about 100 years ago. Given that the Supreme Court is the most powerful of the three branches of government - the result of their taking onto themselves a power not given them in the Constitution, the power to declare laws unconstitutional which they asserted in 1803 - it becomes ever more important that there be a Democrat in the White House over the next two terms when it becomes increasingly likely that one of the conservative members of the court will retire.

Thom's picture
Thom
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Comments

I'm surprised the Democrats haven't come up with a color coded Supreme Court threat level warning system, for when their poll numbers are down.

What's really important, is that we have politicians that actually work for us. Few actually do, and both parties work to keep them powerless.

Single issue voting is for minions, not citizens.

Common_Man_Jason's picture
Common_Man_Jason
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

The failed premise here is the belief that supporting corporate democrats is really helping things. If both parties move to the right then the dem's simply supply the less radical corporatists to the court

mattnapa's picture
mattnapa
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Probably, at some point when people come to their senses, the Supreme Court will have to be expanded to over-rule wacko far-right Justices.

The numbers on the Supreme Court are set by Congress....not the Constitution. The number of its members. has varied over the lifetime of the nation.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote polycarp2:

Probably, at some point when people come to their senses, the Supreme Court will have to be expanded to over-rule wacko far-right Justices.

The numbers on the Supreme Court are set by Congress....not the Constitution. The number of its members. has varied over the lifetime of the nation.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

Not even the very popular FDR could get away with expanding the Supreme Court in order to change its majority. And that was when the Supreme Court was the only thing in the way of most of his New Deal policies. It just takes way too much political capital.

Common_Man_Jason's picture
Common_Man_Jason
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

At one time, the Supreme Court only had 5 Justices. Now it has nine. Membership can be increased....and it isn't easy. It would take a majority of Progresives in both Houses of Congress to do it. That isn't easy, either.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

There's a 1 in 20 Chance of the Apocalypse. Shouldn't We Act Now?

A new study published in Science argues that we as a civilization need to move "rapidly" -- as in almost immediately -- towards a carbon emissions free future if we are to have any chance of holding off runaway global warming:

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system