Anthony Kennedy

75th Anniversary Of Supreme Court “Packing” Plan Of FDR: Its Significance Today

Ronald 1 Comment

Seventy five years ago on this day, President Franklin D. Roosevelt introduced his plan to reorganize the Supreme Court, becoming known as an attempt to “pack” the Court, which became a turning point in many ways, including the fact that it was repudiated by the Senate in July 1937; weakened the power and clout of FDR shortly after his landslide victory in 1936; and led rapidly to a transformation of the Court, and FDR replacing, over the next five years, all but two members of the Court he was challenging.

The Supreme Court had stood in the way of change and progress during the Great Depression, declaring many New Deal laws unconstitutional, and FDR brought the Justices under attack as a result. Bitterly criticized as acting dictatorial, FDR was put on the defensive, but the long range was the Court adapting to an expansive view of the Constitution within a short time, and leading to a Court which dealt with the expansion of federal power and greater support of civil liberties and civil rights.

Today, three quarters of a century later, the Republican dominated Supreme Court has opened up the gates of campaign spending abuse in election campaigns, by its Citizens United decision of 2010. Additionally, crucial cases, including the Obama Health Care Plan, are to be decided by June, which will determine the fate of much of what Barack Obama has done and wishes to do as part of his agenda as President. Obama already made clear his criticism of the direction of the Court two years ago, with the Justices sitting there at the State of the Union Address. And three of the nine Justices–Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito–have boycotted the past two State of the Union Addresses, and represent the major challenge to the Obama Presidency, more than any other members of the Court.

No one is saying or predicting that Obama will attempt such a bold act as FDR did, and were he to do so, it would certainly cause the biggest controversy and split possible to imagine, greater than any issue so far in his administration.

But the Supreme Court IS an issue in the upcoming Presidential campaign, as the likelihood of replacements on the Court in the next term are very likely. This is particularly the case with Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who has had bouts with cancer, and would pass 80 years of age at the beginning of the next term. Her liberal vote would be lost if the Republicans win the White House and she leaves the Court. Additionally, based on aging, it is possible to imagine that Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, and Stephen Breyer could leave the Court before 2017.

So who is elected President, and who controls the majority of the US Senate, which would need to confirm a Court appointment, is very significant, although not much attention is being paid to this issue because of the troubles with the economy.

The Supreme Court’s Political Impact On The 2012 Presidential And Congressional Elections

Ronald Leave a comment

The Supreme Court has decided to intervene and settle three controversial issues that are key factors in the 2012 Presidential and Congressional Elections.

They have taken on the case of the Obama Health Care law; the Arizona Immigration legislation; and the Texas Congressional Redistricting case, all of which have a much greater impact than just the specific details of the cases on their own.

If the Health Care legislation is declared unconstitutional , it will create chaos in the health care field, as parts of the law are already in effect.

If the decision on the Arizona law regarding illegal immigration favors that state, it will create the danger of further spreading of such actions all over, and create new civil liberties issues for the foreign born in this country, and weaken the power of the federal government over immigration, which has always been a national responsibility.

If the decision is to back Texas redistricting, which is seen as unfair gerrymandering, and an attempt to weaken Hispanic and Latino influence in Texas, as well as unfair advantage for the Republican Party over the Democratic Party in that state, then it will reverberate elsewhere.

These three cases are crucial for the future of our political, social and economic system, and will be among the most significant cases of recent times in Supreme Court history.

The reality that the Court could go too far to the right is a long term troubling matter, and also brings to the forefront the importance of who is President in 2013 and after, as the likelihood of Supreme Court replacements grows in the next term, with one to three replacements possible, and determining the long term future direction of the Supreme Court.

The cases also highlight the importance, again, of Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, considered the “swing” vote on a Court equally divided between Left and Right!

So to say that the Supreme Court does not get involved in politics is, very clearly, a misunderstanding of our system of government!

The Supreme Court: Most Important Issue Of Presidential Campaign Of 2012

Ronald 2 Comments

It is amazing how little this Presidential campaign of 2012 has been connected to foreign policy, and to constitutional law, as if ONLY the economy matters.

As much as the Great Recession and its supposed aftermath has created a major crisis for Americans, to overemphasize it is a dangerous action, as the LONG RANGE problem is much more our relations with the world AND the future of our judiciary.

Regarding the judiciary, the thought that a Republican President would select MORE conservatives to a Court already top heavy with conservatives is absolutely terrifying on issues such as the power and influence of corporations, the rights of women, the rights of gays, the role of religion in government, and the struggle to preserve civil rights and civil liberties.

For instance, if Michael Dukakis had been elected in 1988 instead of George H. W. Bush, we would not have had Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court.

If John Kerry had been elected President in 2004, instead of George W. Bush, we would not have had John Roberts and Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court.

Going further back, if Walter Mondale had defeated Ronald Reagan in 1984, we would not have had Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court, and Justice William Rehnquist would not have become Chief Justice.

So the election of the President has LONG TERM consequences in judicial and constitutional interpretation, just as much as foreign policy is not only short term, but long range affecting.

When one realizes that Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 78, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy are 75, it seems realistic to believe that all three COULD be out of office in the next term of office.

So the Court could become more conservative if a Republican is elected to the Presidency, and more moderate if Barack Obama is elected to a second term in the White House.

Therefore, every voter MUST realize that the Presidential election has consequences, not only in foreign policy long term, but also in the future of our legal system and our constitutional rights.

The Troy Davis Case: Capital Punishment On Trial, And The Supreme Court Disgraces Itself!

Ronald 1 Comment

The decision of the US Supreme Court to allow the execution of Troy Davis by the state of Georgia tonight is a legal travesty, and makes the Supreme Court look more than ever what it is rapidly becoming–a total disgrace!

It is shocking to the author that the decision of the Court was unanimous! How could it be that Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan could sit by and allow themselves to be bullied by Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito, and that Chief Justice John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy could not see the virtue of allowing a lie detector test; would not consider that a number of prison wardens called for clemency because of doubts about the evidence, none of which was physical and with no gun found; would not take into account that seven out of nine witnesses in the trial recanted; would not listen to five jurors in the case who said they regret their decision to convict and give the death penalty; and would not listen to a witness who said one of the other witnesses confessed that he had been the murderer of the police officer in Savannah, Georgia, in 1989!

This execution puts capital punishment on trial, and it is barbaric that a country that prides itself on democratic virtues and values allows the death penalty when there is evidence so often that innocent people are being executed, many of them minorities in Southern states that have always been “excellent” in utilizing the death penalty against the racial minority that they exploited in slavery and segregation! This is an enhanced way to utilize racism and justify it!

One would like to believe that the “Old South” has passed into history, but actually it has NOT in any sense! Not only do Southern states use the death penalty very often, but also they seem to revel in the fact that seven of the “Old South” states–all but Virginia, Florida, Georgia and Texas–joined with border states Kentucky and West Virginia, to be nine of the ten poorest states, according to the US Census of 2010!

The “Old South” is great at executing people, and keeping them ignorant and in poverty, and by no coincidence, they tend to be RED states, those that tend to vote Republican!

Is this something the GOP should be proud of? And is it conscionable that Republican candidates tend to ignore poverty, never mentioning the disgrace of it in 21st century America, and this including millions of poor whites, as well as minorities?

This is a sad moment for America, but hopefully, it will start up the fight to end capital punishment as against American democracy, making us look terrible in the viewpoint of our friends, European countries, that do not allow the death penalty, and do just fine without it!

The Sharply Divided Supreme Court And The Future: Crucial Cases Coming Up!

Ronald Leave a comment

The US Supreme Court demonstrated two tendencies in the past term just ended: Support of corporation rights at the expense of the public interest, and absolute worship of the First Amendment right to freedom of speech in ways many just shake their head at in wonderment!

But if there is controversy over some of the Supreme Court decisions of the term now over, just wait to the next session of the Court in 2011-2012!

What kinds of “hot” issues are to show up for oral argument and decision in the next term?

1. The Obama Health Care Plan’s constitutionality
2. Affirmative Action
3. Illegal Immigration
4. Gay Marriage

It seems as if no one is leaving the Court, although one would have thought that Ruth Bader Ginsberg might have retired, so it will be the same nine member, equally divided Court, with Anthony Kennedy the swing vote on many cases, deciding some of the most controversial areas of political debate in this country, and deciding if we are moving ahead, or falling back into the 20th, and maybe, the 19th century!

Gay Marriage And The Supreme Court: Anthony Kennedy The Crucial Vote!

Ronald Leave a comment

In 1967, the US Supreme Court issued a decision in Loving V. Virginia, declaring interracial marriage constitutional. At the time, there was still widespread feeling among the American people, particularly whites, that interracial marriage should not be allowed, with three out of four in a 1968 poll so declaring. And nearly the same percentage, 73 percent, of all races felt the same way in 1968.

It is clear, also, that a majority of people, particularly whites, were not supportive of the Supreme Court decision in 1954, Brown V. Board of Education, which mandated the end of segregation of the races in public education.

Often, the Supreme Court is ahead of the country in formulating change, and of course, conservatives resent that. But without the Court intervening, progress would be slower or completely halted.

Therefore, with the decision of New York State to allow gay marriage, it is time for gay rights advocates to bring a case to the higher court!

But, of course, there is fear that the conservative Court would rule against it, but that is seen as highly unlikely.

No one can be sure how Justices would vote, but even if one considers that Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Chief Justice John Roberts might vote against, the odds are that Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Stephen Breyer, and Ruth Bader Ginsberg would vote in favor.

That leaves Justice Anthony Kennedy, the true centrist on the Court, who more often votes with the conservatives, but often sides with the liberals. And when one considers that Kennedy was the decisive vote in Lawrence V. Texas in 2003, granting privacy rights to gay couples, one has hope that he would continue to support gay rights, including marriage.

Kennedy also supported the rights of gays to stop being treated as a group deserving discrimination in the Colorado Constitution in Romer V. Evans in 1996, and also in a Circuit Court case in 1980, he showed concern about mistreatment of gays.

The timing is crucial, as Ruth Bader Ginsberg may leave the Court soon, and in the next term in office, if a Republican won the White House, both Ginsberg and Kennedy might be replaced, based on their ages, and the opportunity for a Supreme Court decision in favor of gay marriage might have passed!

And remember, unlike interracial marriage, a majority of Americans in a recent poll support the concept of gay marriage, a massive switch from just a few years ago!

So bring on a Supreme Court case and soon!

Supreme Court Issues Surprising Decision On California Prisoners: Release 30,000 Inmates Within Two Years!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Supreme Court, in a surprise decision by 5-4, ordered California yesterday to release 30,000 inmates in its prison population due to improper care and attention to the medical and mental problems faced by many prisoners.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, the swing vote on the Court, again surprised people in that he joined the four liberals–Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginseberg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan–in arguing that the living conditions of many prisoners were unacceptable under the 8th Amendment’s banning of “cruel and unusual punishment”!

The case, Brown V. Plata, drew an oral condemnation from Justice Antonin Scalia, and an equally scathing written attack by Justice Samuel Alito, and Justice Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts also joined the minority.

California, in the midst of a horrible economic crisis, will need to find solutions within two years, and possibly gain an extension, and can utilize new construction, out of state transfers and utilizing county facilities to resolve the issue. Otherwise, up to 30,000 inmates could be unleashed on the general population, a security issue of horrifying proportions if it actually comes to be!

While the future seems grim, Justice Kennedy can be applauded for recognizing the concept of human dignity and a minimal condition of medical care and basic sustenance, and Kennedy has long been a critic of long and harsh sentences.

Realize that not all of the inmates of California state prisons are murderers or rapists, as many are in prison on drug convictions, and there have been laws in California requiring a three strikes concept that puts a prisoner under a life term, no matter how small the infractions on later legal issues.

Key solutions that will arise over the next few years under Governor Jerry Brown will be financing, meaning the need for more taxes to support keeping more people in state prison; making sure that violent criminals do not walk the streets in the future; and overcoming recidivism by promoting real job training and mental health intervention to assist parolees in finding work and going straight, rather than returning to prison through a “revolving door”!

It is clear that America has never been very good at promoting change in felons, whether younger or older. The tendency has been to “throw the keys away”, but in reality, that is not a solution long term, and we must work as a nation on improving the odds of prisoners learning from their incarceration, and hopefully not having to return to prison after having created new victims!

Obama Health Care Plan Reaches One Year Old: Will It Reach Its Second Birthday?

Ronald 1 Comment

President Obama’s Health Care Reform reached one year of age today, and is under assault in many states controlled by Republicans and conservatives, who are hoping to see the Supreme Court ultimately declare it unconstitutional.

Despite the fact that the Health Care Reform helps millions of people in the long run, and many of them already, with its various provisions, all we seem to get is constant criticism and attacks, as if the goal that all Americans should have health care is, somehow, an evil intention.

The nastiness and mean spirit of the critics shows clearly a lack of concern for the welfare of millions of children, poor, sick, and those with chronic medical conditions. Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona can have no compassion or conscience in failing to find a way to assist 96 very sick Arizonans who need all kinds of transplants to avoid ultimate death.

And the anger over requiring citizens to insure themselves against illness is mind boggling, as failure to do so puts the burden on everyone else, really a welfare concept, when people should be responsible for their own health care, to the extent that they all have an insurance policy, as part of the responsibility of being an adult!

The Supreme Court could indeed declare the Health Care Reform unconstitutional, which would create a constitutional crisis on the level of FDR and the Supreme Court in the 1930s when they declared large portions of the New Deal unconstitutional, but soon led to rapid turnover on the Court and the acceptance of the New Deal.

Hopefully, Justice Anthony Kennedy will surprise, as he often does, and make a 5-4 vote on the Health Care Reform sometime next year, before the Presidential election, or else it will be the major domestic issue for 2012!

The Westboro Baptist Church, The Supreme Court, And Free Speech

Ronald 2 Comments

What the author feared would happen has indeed occurred!

The Supreme Court of the United States has, by an 8-1 vote, decided that the hateful, anti gay Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas, headed by the Reverend Fred Phelps, and consisting of about 50 people, almost all his relatives, have the right to disrupt military funerals of soldiers killed in Iraq or Afghanistan to protest the fact that gays have rights, and that America is going to the devil because gays are allowed to exist in America!

The fact that a military funeral is a time of mourning and stress for those connected to the dead soldier apparently had no effect on the Court, except for Associate Justice Samuel Alito, who, somewhat surprisingly, was the only dissenter.

So the Westboro Baptist Church can continue its evil deeds and disrupt funerals and promote hate, and the right of privacy of funeral attenders, including the family of the deceased, does not matter!

This despicable group not only has done this dastardly deed to families of soldiers, but also were present at the funeral of the nine year old girl murdered when Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was seriously wounded in Tucson, Arizona in January. The only difference there was that a large group of sympathizers of the parents of the young girl formed a wall of resistance to these characters, and kept them much further away from the funeral procession.

This is not, in the author’s mind, freedom of speech, or freedom of religion, or freedom of assembly. To call the Westboro Baptist Church a church is a mockery of the whole concept of religion!

All decent people will deplore this decision, and be embarrassed that Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined with Chief Justice John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and even the ultimate swing vote, Anthony Kennedy, in writing this reprehensible decision!

This is not a victory for free speech, but rather a victory for hate, and insanity, and lack of respect for the dead, and lack of patriotism regarding the military, who sacrifice themselves every day in far off lands!

Surprising, but the author must commend Samuel Alito for having the courage to go against the tide, a man that the author has not highly admired. So I salute Alito for his brave stand for decency!

The Obama Health Care Legislation Under Attack! It Could Stand Or Fall On Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Decision! :(

Ronald Leave a comment

The Obama Health Care legislation has come under severe attack from federal district court judges in Virginia and now Florida, with the Florida judge declaring the entire act unconstitutional! 🙁

26 states have petitioned the courts to undermine the legislation, and the purpose seems to be to destroy the entire law, even the parts that any sane person would support, such as keeping children on to age 26, ending a lifetime ban on coverage over a set amount, allowing a company to drop coverage once someone becomes sick, and preventing coverage for the millions of people with pre-existing conditions!

To think that a piece of legislation could be negated by a body of unelected, unaccountable judges, instead of an elected body of legislators is, to say the least, very disconcerting! 🙁

It is now obvious that the legislation will come up for review by the Supreme Court during the election campaign of 2012. And it is assumed that Justices Scalia, Alito, Thomas and Chief Justice Roberts will vote against it, and that Justices Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan will support it, leaving Justice Kennedy with the swing vote, as is often the case.

Years ago, conservatives complained that the Supreme Court is really the Kennedy Court, as his vote decided most cases by a 5-4 vote, and there was anger when Kennedy went with the liberals on the court on several cases, including Lawrence V. Texas, the gay rights case in 2003.

However, in recent years, Kennedy has more often joined the conservative side than the liberal side, so indeed the future of the health care law may hang on what he, a singular human being, determines is constitutional! 🙁