18 November 2019

Some interesting Supreme Court history and its implications, as uncovered by Thom Hartmann

 This is really interesting. Back in the early days of the Reagan administration, when the shoe was very much on the other ideological foot with regard to the Supreme Court, the Righties, in fact none other than CURRENT Chief Justice of the United States, John Roberts (then a DOJ lawyer), thought seriously about a fairly radical interpretation of the Constitutional provision whereby the Congress determines exactly what the Supreme Court has jurisdiction over, as a means of reversing landmark decisions like Brown v. Bd. of Ed. and Roe v. Wade. The truth is that the period from about 1935 to 1990 or so, when the SC was a force for progress and human rights in America, was the aberration. Since then, the court has mostly reverted to norm, and the Court is, as it was before FDR almost throughout all of American history to that time, a reactionary force that exists mostly to protect the interests of the already powerful. Wouldn't it be delicious, if perhaps too risky to actually contemplate doing, to use Roberts's idea against THEM, and undo not Brown and Roe but Buckley v. Valeo, Citizens United v. FEC, Heller v. DC, and Shelby County v. Holder?

If you don't know what all four of those cases stand for, look them up, because every citizen should know in detail just how and when the Supreme Court took our rights away, step by step.

Supreme Court History includes John Robert's memo how to bypass court by enacting statutes with provisions removing judicial review.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Gyromantic Informicon. Comments are not moderated. If you encounter a problem, please go to home page and follow directions to send me an e-mail.