Monday, June 29, 2015

The Real Changes in SCOTUS as an Institution

Chief Justice J Roberts plain old does not believe it is his job to OVERRULE the will of the majority as expressed in the elections of 08 and 12 and brought into reality in Obamacare.

He literally said as much in the first Obamacare decision labeling the mandate, a tax.

Whether or not he is concerned for his domain (SCOTUS) and it’s reputation he has attempted to align the result of passed law with the will of a majority of (voting) citizens. Majority rule this way is a mob. A nicer mob, but a mob all the same.

The opposite and CORRECT style of rulings of SCOTUS should IMHO always be, ‘may the heavens fall but let justice be done’ and what is justice?

1789 as amended.

If justice discomfits the people, WE WILL FIGURE OUT THE WAY AROUND and or through, just as we did in 1954. If governing ourselves was easy, trained dogs would have a nation.

Prospective justices should always be held to a result of questioning during confirmation as to their rulings having FIDELITY to the constitution as opposed to their personal and or PREVAILING political opinions and conscience of the day.

Prospective justices who admit during Congressional questioning to feeling a moral imperative to the creation of Constitutional changes according to their personal conscience as opposed to strict interpretation of the written Constitution should be rejected, and those who LIE about this, or change their mind in order to get on SCOTUS and effect change, or just CHANGE, should feel the weight of redress by Constitutional methods.

Whatever this process requires should be undertaken right up to amending the founding document. This is SERIOUS business.

In this case, while Roberts may have found a tortuous path to a tax in the 1st Obamacare decision, this latest, is a complete distortion of BOTH the purposeful wording of the law (meant to blackmail states into exchanges and medicaid expansion), and the IDEA OF SCOTUS DOING JUSTICE by the word of the law, since the majority opinion among other weaknesses in the ruling, made reference to the lack of congressional readiness in the event  they ruled exchanges by the federal govt, ILLEGAL. SCOTUS decided what was ‘really intended’ (to compel everyone) as opposed to the real word of the law (which substituted political coercion for frank compulsion and ultimately FORCE).

Maybe our daily state would have been different with a different KIND of president. For instance, if it had been Harold Ford. Or maybe this is a stage of the republic in which the people themselves must, in learning how to govern themselves, amid all the news sources, THEMSELVES POLITICIZED, must lead those concerned with the preeminence of reelection (self interest, and their position afterwards …Eric Cantor anyone?) as opposed to the national interest, and the people‘s well being.

Every single aspect of the executive, legislature and now SCOTUS in this USA is completely politicized, and thus CORRUPTED.

And THAT is why we, nearly ALL americans have lost confidence in every institution which supposedly represents us, and now instead represents those who are supposed to represent our will.

I am beginning to fear we are like a cube of sugar in the bottom of the clear glass of tea.

Our shape is completely distinct, but with a good solid rap, just a bunch of individual crystals laying at the bottom.


Anonymous said...

IOW: a rubber stamp for mob rule. Wonder how that will work out.

Anonymous said...

What about the outcomes of the elections of 2010 and 2014? 2010 was a direct result of popular hostility to the ACA. I guess that didn't away Roberts.

Epaminondas said...

I would guess he would say, if the voters were serious Ocare would be repealed by veto proof majority, just as dems had in 09.

It's amazing, that when you think things are so terrible, and then there's a new way, a new bend which makes it all worse and insitutions seemingly unravel.