Anthony Kennedy

Federal District Court Judges And Same Sex Marriage Bans Collapsing!

Ronald 1 Comment

The move toward same sex marriage churns on, with federal judges having utilized the 14th Amendment in four “Red” states in the past two months now to end the discrimination against gays marrying.

So on Valentine’s Day, it now looks more evident than ever that a national Supreme Court decision is in the offing, with Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority decision in Lawrence V. Texas in 2003 igniting the gay civil rights movement, likely to be the fifth and decisive vote in any case that goes to the high Court!

Who would ever have thought that Utah, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and now, newly turned “Blue” Virginia (the state of the Loving V. Virginia interracial marriage case in 1967), would see such rapid action to defy the bigots and the haters?

The federal courts have been the herald of the future in so much of modern history, as with Brown V. Board of Education on racial integration, and Roe V. Wade on abortion rights, and Lawrence V. Texas on gay rights, and the courage of federal district judges across the nation to push the Supreme Court toward a final determination of same sex marriage is an indication that often we have to leave it to appointed judges to lead us to our better side of human nature, the ending of discrimination and injustice!

Sadly, we see right wing evangelicals, Catholics, and Mormons fighting a rear guard action, which only makes one realize the evils of these organized groups that have in the past been on the wrong side of many moral and ethical issues, overlooking slavery, segregation, women’s rights, and now gay rights. This is a losing battle long term, and these groups fighting against progress and human rights will pay the price in loss of membership by their willingness to fight a battle that is already lost!

The Future Democratic Party Majority On The US Supreme Court

Ronald 3 Comments

When one looks at the Supreme Court in recent decades, it is clear that it has been a conservative Supreme Court, dominated by Republican appointments, and it has shown in such decisions as the Citizens United Case of 2010, and the partial repeal of the Voting Rights Act in 2013, along with numerous other such cases tilted to the right side of the political spectrum.

So for progressives and Democrats, it has been a difficult time, wondering how the Supreme Court can be returned to the glorious era of the Warren Court and Burger Court from 1953-1986.

But there is the reality that the Supreme Court’s future for the Democratic Party and progressivism is very bright over the next decade, assuming what seems highly likely, that Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or some other Democratic Presidential nominee will have the electoral college advantage for 2016, and likely for the following 2020 Presidential election.

If indeed the Democrats keep the White House beyond 2016, time and age will turn the Court into a majority Democratic Party appointed Court for sure!

History tells us this fact: If a party keeps control of the White House for an extended period of time, the Court becomes more than ever reflective of that political party.

So, for example, from 1933-1953, we had 20 years of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry Truman in the White House, and a total of 13 Supreme Court appointments, all by these two Democratic Presidents, helping to shape the future Court, with a few “liberal” appointments by Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower (Earl Warren and William Brennan), insuring a continuation of that trend.

But it can be said that from 1953-2013, sixty years of history, the Republicans held the White House for a total of 36 years to the Democrats’ total of 24 years.

In those 60 years, the Republican Presidents made 18 appointments to the Supreme Court, to the Democratic total of just 8 appointments, more than a 2-1 majority. While Republican appointments included Warren, Brennan, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, and David Souter, all quite liberal appointments, even so it still meant that 12 Republican appointments were quite conservative or VERY conservative, so the Supreme Court represents a strongly Republican flavor.

But now, we have four aging Supreme Court Justices–Ruth Bader Ginsberg (80 this year), Antonin Scalia (77 this year), Anthony Kennedy (77 this year), and Stephen Breyer (75 this year), and to believe that by 2020, that any or all of these members of the Court will be still serving, seems quite unreasonable, as they would be ranging between 82 and 87 by the year 2020!

And Justice Clarence Thomas, although claiming he will stay on the Court for 43 years, until age 86, would be 72 in 2020, and Samuel Alito would 70 in 2020.

No one is saying that either Thomas or Alito will have left the Court, but if the four elderly Justices have left, they would all be Democratic Party appointments if the Democrats keep the White House, highly likely, and that would mean SIX of the nine members of the Court would be Democratic appointments, including Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

Only Thomas, Alito, and Chief Justice John Roberts would be Republican appointments in the year 2020 under this scenario!

So, for Democrats and Progressives, there is hope for a very different Court over the next decade and beyond!

Proud Day Of Civil Rights 49 Years Ago, And Now Backtracking On Lyndon B. Johnson!

Ronald 4 Comments

49 years ago today, President Lyndon B. Johnson had his proudest moment in office, signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and then following up with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Finally, the tragedy of the years after 1877, the end of Reconstruction, was being rectified, 88 and 89 years after African Americans in the South were abandoned by the Republican Party in preference to an alliance with big business and industry committed to economic aggrandizement, and political insensitivity to not only African Americans, immigrants, women, children and even native born men that made up the industrial labor force, exploited until the Progressive Era started to rectify the worst evils of industrial capitalism!

And now, a half century later after Lyndon B. Johnson, it is the Republicans on the Supreme Court who are allowing unbridled capitalism to be seen as “people”, and in the process corrupting the system again, including victimizing all of the groups above, and negating the protection of minorities, the poor, elderly and college students in the states that had a long history of discrimination in voting rights, and now will have open access to do it once again, as if the civil rights era never occurred!

The Supreme Court majority is attempting to negate the Warren and Burger Courts in the great progress they made toward social justice and legal equality for oppressed groups, and this is a tragedy that will continue to emerge until and when Democratic Presidents can select more members of the Court to replace aging Justices, including Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy.

But sadly, the impact of Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, the legacy of the two Bush Presidencies, is likely to continue for the long haul, and set back the nation on so many issues over the years to come!

Supreme Court DNA Ruling An Attack On Privacy Rights

Ronald 27 Comments

In a very disturbing decision, the Supreme Court on Monday, by a 5-4 vote, allowed for police to collect DNA samples whenever anyone is arrested, seeing it as equivalent of photographs and fingerprints, and allowing its collection in a national data base.

The combination of those in favor included Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority decision, along with Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Chief Justice John Roberts , and surprisingly, Stephen Breyer.

The four in opposition were Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and surprisingly, Antonin Scalia.

The attack on constitutional rights is alarming, and the Court majority seems to have no problem with that! Again, very disturbing!

Momentous Supreme Court Month Coming Up: Gay Marriage, Affirmative Action, Voting Rights Act Cases To Be Decided

Ronald 1 Comment

The United States Supreme Court is entering its last month of the present session, and as usual, is leaving its most blockbuster decisions to the last weeks of its term.

Every June is momentous on the Supreme Court, as for instance, the upholding of the Obama Health Care Plan last June.

But this June is possibly more crucial when looking at history, as well as the issue of civil rights and civil liberties!

The most important cases are on Gay Marriage, Affirmative Action, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

With so much at stake, with 13 states having legalized gay marriage, and more to come in the next year, it would be wonderful if the Supreme Court went the whole distance, as it did in Loving V. Virginia on interracial marriage in 1967. It would be a major victory for civil rights and civil liberties, and stop the right wing attempt to fight gay marriage dead in its tracks! The hate mongering would go on, but if the Court ruled that two men or two women can be married, it could not be overcome by religious extremists by law!

Affirmative Action has been in effect since 1972, and remains highly controversial, but is now in danger or being ended as a method to promote the advancement of minority groups and women.

The Voting Rights Act, first passed in 1965, and renewed in 1982 and 2006, is now in danger of being curbed or ended, on the false basis that the record of Southern and other states on voting rights in the past no longer applies, but that leaves open the possibility of new voting rights violations in the future.

It is assumed that there are four votes on the Court to uphold all three cases–those of Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elana Kagan.

It is also assumed that three votes to prevent gay marriage and end affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act are certain–those of Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito.

It would be a major surprise if any of these seven votes ended up differently.

The two “swing” votes are those of Chief Justice John Roberts, who has become somewhat unpredictable after, surprisingly, backing ObamaCare last June; and Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, the true “swing” vote alone, since Sandra Day O’Connor left the Court seven years ago.

Will Kennedy side with the liberals on the Court on all three cases? It seems highly unlikely at this point, but a good bet on gay marriage at the least, but the Court could choose to decide that case in a very limited manner, not an all encompassing decision.

We shall see on all three cases very soon!

Justice Harry Blackmun (1973), Justice Anthony Kennedy (2003), And The Likelihood Of Transformative Moment In Constitutional History Again!

Ronald 10 Comments

Associate Justice Harry Blackmun was a THIRD choice of President Richard Nixon for the Supreme Court in 1970 after rejection of Clement Haynesworth and G. Harrold Carswell, and Blackmun went on to make history in 1973, in authoring the decision in Roe V. Wade, arguably the most important decision in modern times on women’s rights!

Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy was a THIRD choice of President Ronald Reagan in 1988 after rejection of Robert Bork and Douglas Ginsburg, and Kennedy went on to make history in 2003, in authoring the majority opinion in Lawrence V. Texas, arguably the most important decision in modern times on gay and lesbian rights!

Are we about to see another transformative moment in the Court’s history and in constitutional history, with the upcoming case on gay marriage, being argued tomorrow and Wednesday, with Kennedy believed likely to continue to support gay advancement, and the hope that he will bring along Chief Justice John Roberts, who has a sense of history, and already showed leadership and courage in backing ObamaCare last June?

Many experts believe the Supreme Court will broadly back gay marriage, although they could just do a narrow decision on Proposition 8 in California, and on the Defense of Marriage Act as an alternative.

But this decision, if broadly based, could be of similar impact, as Loving V. Virginia was on interracial marriage in 1967, or Brown V. Board Of Education was on racial integration of public schools in 1954!

Hillary Clinton’s Endorsement Of Gay Marriage: What It Portends

Ronald 3 Comments

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has finally endorsed gay marriage in a strong public statement, mirroring her husband’s statement that the Defense of Marriage Act, passed during his Presidency in 1996, was a mistake, and that it was time for it to be repealed.

Hillary Clinton has always been a strong supporter of gay rights, but avoided gay marriage until now.

The question is why, and there are three answers:

The Supreme Court is about to hear a case that could transform this nation on the subject of marriage, unlike anything since Loving V Virginia in 1967, which finally declared interracial marriage to be constitutional. Extra pressure on the Court at a time like this cannot help but possibly influence Justice Anthony Kennedy and Chief Justice John Roberts, either or both who could be the decisive votes on the case.

Many Democrats have endorse gay marriage, including President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and potential Democratic nominees for President, including Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York and Governor Martin O’Malley of Maryland, so if Hillary Clinton is soon to decide to run for President in 2016 she would, obviously, need to get into line on the issue.

Also, Hillary could be taking this step out of pure principle, and belief that the time is right for this significant social advancement.

No matter what the motivation, and it is probably all three, it is proper to salute Hillary Clinton for speaking up, once again, for human rights and human dignity!

Senator Rob Portman, Gay Marriage, And The Republican Party Future

Ronald 6 Comments

Ohio Republican Senator Rob Portman, former Budget Director for President George W. Bush, one of the few moderate conservative voices in the Republican Party in the US Senate, has come out in favor of gay marriage, making him the first Republican Senator to do so, and unlikely to have others follow him. This seems, clearly, due to the fact that his younger son Will is gay, and Portman wants his son to have a happy life, and the rights and privileges of marriage someday.

One could point out that Portman only spoke up because of his son, which is clearly the case, but it still took courage for him to do what he did.

And it is interesting to see former Senator Rick Santorum spew his usual narrow minded hatred, and one has to wonder what if one of his children came out as gay or lesbian. As a “devout” Catholic, he probably would do what so many “devout” Christians have done, sadly, and that is to throw out their child, disown him or her, have no more contact with him or her, act as if that child no longer exists, rather than understand that gays do not choose to be what they are. Why would anyone want to be facing hate, prejudice, discrimination, and bodily threats if one could avoid it?

So for anyone claiming to be “devout” and “religious” and act like Rick Santorum and so many others, is hypocrisy, and until and when the Republican Party stops allowing the religious Right to control the party agenda, it will never win over the vote of the younger generation, which is totally tolerant on the issue of sexual orientation.

Many non office holding Republicans have come out for gay marriage rights, and Ted Olson, former Solicitor General under George W. Bush, is leading the case to be presented before the Supreme Court, and there is a feeling that the majority of the Court, led by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who made for the success in the Lawrence V. Texas case in 2003, on gay privacy rights, will declare gay marriage rights to be constitutional throughout the United States, although churches and synagogues would not be required to marry gay people. Such a decision for gay marriage would involve the right of civil marriage alone.

The Republican Party needs to change its view, or else, like in many other ways, it will go into the dustbin of history!

The Impeachment Threat Against Chief Justice John Roberts: Totally Ludicrous!

Ronald 1 Comment

The right wing extremists are at it again, now threatening to move to impeach Chief Justice John Roberts IF he swears in President Barack Obama next weekend for his second term in office.

The “Birther” movement, led by Orly Taitz and others, and still insisting that Barack Obama is not eligible to be President because he was born in Kenya, is leading the movement to force Roberts out of office, a totally insane and ludicrous idea!

As has been stated earlier in another entry, a President can be sworn in by ANY judge, and examples of such are Lyndon B. Johnson sworn in by Federal District Court judge Sarah Hughes on Air Force One after the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963; and Calvin Coolidge, sworn into office in the middle of the night in Vermont by his own father, a local justice of the peace in 1923.

And if Roberts refused to swear in the President, which he will not do, then ANY of the other Supreme Court Justices, such as Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, or Anthony Kennedy, could do the same. Does the “Birther” Movement plan to impeach all of the members of the Supreme Court?

And were Roberts or any Supreme Court Justice to be impeached by the House of Representatives, which is highly unlikely, particularly for Roberts, who was appointed by George W. Bush, there is no chance of gaining a two thirds vote in the Senate to remove him from office! With a Democratic Senate, not even half the votes would be obtained, even if all 45 Republicans were to vote to convict, something that is absolutely NOT going to happen!

All that the “Birther” Movement is doing is adding to its image as a group of wing nuts, not worthy of newsprint or any other public attention!

And Chief Justice Roberts, a man who has wished to avoid controversy, now can commiserate with President Obama, particularly after Roberts’ crucial vote upholding “ObamaCare” in June of last year, a path breaking moment in the history of the Court and of American reform!

Right Wing Lunatics Never Let Up On Aim To Destroy Barack Obama!

Ronald Leave a comment

The wing nut right wing never stops attacking Barack Obama!

They claim that Obama is a Muslim President, despite the fact that the President has been responsible for the killing of more Muslims than George W. Bush. Obama has utilized the drone program in Afghanistan effectively, and has been able to end the lives of many terrorists, including Osama Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders, but it is never enough!

Glenn Beck, the lunatic, has now said that if any of his staff members mention Obama’s name in the next four years, they will be fired. He plans to avoid mentioning Obama at all, but if so, how will he continue to make his millions as a demagogue dividing America, since his whole living has been based on destroying Obama with his reckless rhetoric?

And there has been a plan by the far right to try to prevent the Electoral College from counting electoral votes, but that was done in early December in all of the state capitols, and the joint session of Congress today will see Vice President Joe Biden open up 51 envelopes and announce the results of the Electoral College. And even if one or two electors are disloyal, Barack Obama and Joe Biden will be declared the winners of the election, since their margin of victory in electoral votes is 62 votes more than the 270 needed to win!

And World Net Daily, an extremist, conspiratorial news website, has suggested that Chief Justice John Roberts announce that he will refuse to swear in the President for another term on Inauguration Day. In actual fact, Roberts will, assuredly, do no such thing, as he worries about his own reputation and that of the Supreme Court, and is not about to destroy his own image and reputation, which has been promoted by his decisive vote in the ObamaCare case in June of 2012!

But even if by some fluke, Roberts went crazy, it is not a requirement that the Chief Justice must give the oath to the President. ANY judge or Justice can do so, and one can be certain that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg or Justice Stephen Breyer or even Justice Anthony Kennedy would take on the responsibility if Roberts was to go off the deep end and destroy his whole career by refusing to do so.

And, finally, Lyndon B. Johnson was sworn in on Air Force One by a woman federal district court judge, Sara Hughes, on November 22, 1963, after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, so again, it does not even have to be a Supreme Court Justice who swears in the President.

It is clear the right wing lunatics will stop at nothing to attack and destroy Barack Obama, but while they make money off gullible and stupid people, it does not change the reality that Barack Obama is the choice of the American people, has accomplished a lot in his first term, and despite constant barriers, will achieve a lot in his second term, and go down as one of our better Presidents in American history!