Bush V. Gore

How The Republican Majority Supreme Court Has Promoted Corporate Control And Voter Suppression, And Undermined American Democracy

Ronald 5 Comments

Citizens United V. Federal Election Commission (2010) and Shelby County V. Holder (2013) are the two decisions of the majority Supreme Court in the last decade which have destroyed the concept of fair and free elections in America.

Those cases, and Bush V Gore (2000) have done everything possible to undermine the majority of the people in Presidential elections, as well as other elections in states, which should have favored the Democratic Party.

And now, with a new right wing Supreme Court Justice, Neil Gorsuch, possibly more extremist than Clarence Thomas or Samuel Alito on the Court since April, the future is very gloomy for progressive values and beliefs.

Realize that the Democrats have won the popular vote in Presidential elections six of the last seven times, from 1992 to 2016, only losing to George W. Bush in 2004.

But the Supreme Court Republican majority has allowed corporations to be seen as people, and this has led to extreme abuse by many wealthy corporate special interests, and individual millionaires and billionaires, to put excessive amounts of funding into negative campaigns against liberals and Democrats, and to fund right wing extremist campaigns for legislation they want, and for conservative candidates they desire.

And loosening the enforcement of voting rights by states has allowed many states to place new voter restrictions on poor people, minorities, young people, and the elderly, making voting an onerous process, and in effect, working for voter suppression, which apparently had an effect in the 2016 Presidential election in some states, and for sure, in Wisconsin, one of the crucial states that gave Donald Trump the victory by a very small margin of votes.

The undermining of American democracy is in full swing, and the fear is that we have just seen the tip of the iceberg in regards to Republican and conservative repression of much of the law and legislation, and the election process itself, in the future, with the ability of Donald Trump and the Republican Party to “fix” the future, one of moving backwards by a century or more in so many respects.

Anthony Kennedy, The Third Choice Of Ronald Reagan For The Supreme Court In 1988!

Ronald Leave a comment

President Ronald Reagan had the misfortune of having two Supreme Court nominees rejected near the end of his term, and forced to choose someone else for the Court.

His nomination of Robert Bork, and then, Douglas Ginsburg, and his selection of Anthony Kennedy in their place in 1988, was a moment of tremendous historical importance.

With either Bork or Ginsburg, it is almost certain, if not so, that gay rights and gay marriage would not have accomplishes the majority votes in 2003, 2013, and now 2015, granting gays and lesbians complete equality, including the right to marry!

The importance of one man and one vote is clear cut, as under our system, the Supreme Court, much more than we realize, has a majority of one vote on significant cases, and that one vote majority transforms America for good or for evil.

One vote on the Court decided Bush V Gore in 2000; one vote on the Court decided the Citizens United Case in 2010; one vote on the Supreme Court decided the dramatic weakening of the Voting Rights Act in 2013.

And the historic importance of Anthony Kennedy cannot be underestimated, as he has been the swing vote on the Court since Sandra Day O’Connor left the court ten years ago. Often, he has sided with the conservatives, but about one third of the time with progressives, as in these various gay rights cases.

Kennedy has had great courage, and he will suffer mightily with denunciations, death threats, and need for Secret Service protection, from right wing crazies who will wish him dead for his role in changing American society permanently.

Anthony Kennedy is truly a profile in courage and principle, and will play a positive role in the history of human rights, when this era we are living in, is written about in future generations!

Gay Marriage Finally National: The Advancement Of Human Rights Reaches A New Pinnacle Of Social Justice!

Ronald 17 Comments

On June 28, 1969, the Stonewall Inn, a gay restaurant and nightclub in Greenwich Village in New York City, was raided by police, leading to a large scale riot. It was the beginning of the gay rights movement, the struggle against oppression.

46 years have passed, and on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court upheld the right of gays and lesbians to marry everywhere in the United States, a path breaking advancement in human rights, reaching a new pinnacle of social justice. It makes America a more perfect democracy, promoting equality and liberty for another class of citizens who have faced oppression. It is a tremendous expansion of human rights and social justice!

America is a better nation for this fantastic development, and much credit is due to several people, including:

Then San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, who was the first chief executive to promote gay marriage in California, and officiate at many gay weddings n 2003. He is now Lieutenant Governor of California, and likely successor to Governor Jerry Brown in the next gubernatorial election in 2018.

Ted Olson and David Boies, opposing attorneys in the Bush-Gore Presidential battle in 2000, who pursued the constitutional case promoting gay marriage, helping to lead it to Supreme Court decision yesterday.

Associate Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the majority opinion in four crucial Supreme Court cases, in 2003 (Lawrence V Texas), two in 2013 (Hollingsworth V Perry) and (US V Windsor), and yesterday (Obergefell V Hodges) Without him, none of this advancement of gay rights and gay marriage could ever have occurred. Interestingly, all four of these cases were decided on June 26, of those years, 2003, 2013, and 2015!

The history of the gay rights movement is yet to be written, but it will be seen as part of the great movement forward as evidenced by the abolitionist crusade against slavery; the woman suffrage movement; the civil rights movement; the labor union movement; the environmental movement; the disability reform movement; the promotion of a safety net as represented by Social Security, Medicare, and now ObamaCare; and the immigration reform movement!

If Hillary Clinton Flounders, What Then For The Democratic Party?

Ronald Leave a comment

Behind the scenes, there is growing trepidation that Hillary Clinton might have damaged her candidacy over the private emails issue, and also, the foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation.

So there are whispers about the issue: What then, for the Democratic Party, if Hillary Clinton flounders?

There are those who think it is time for Vice President Joe Biden to decide to enter the race.

There are those who think it is time for Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren to stop stating she will not run, and to enter the race.

There are those who think that former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, who has been hinting he would run no matter what Hillary Clinton does, to do just that.

There are those who hope that the hints that Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders would run are going to lead to his actual candidacy.

There are those who think that former Virginia Senator Jim Webb will offer himself as the more conservative alternative within the Democratic Party, as he has hinted earlier.

But now there are other whisperings, including Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and or New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand thinking of entering the race, with women particularly looking to Gillibrand as the younger version of Hillary Clinton.

And, believe it or not, there is a “blast from the past”, with three former Presidential seekers thought to be considering getting back into the competition for the Presidency: Jerry Brown, John Kerry, and Al Gore!

Imagine a candidate who last ran in 1992 against Bill Clinton, running against his wife 16 years later, and having first run for President in 1976 and 1980 against Jimmy Carter!

Imagine the Democratic Presidential nominee of 12 years ago choosing to leave the State Department and decide to run, possibly against the brother of the man, George W. Bush, that he lost to in 2004!

Imagine the Democratic Presidential nominee of 2000, who won the popular vote but lost the electoral vote in a Supreme Court decision, Bush V. Gore, that gave Bush the Presidency, now coming back nearly a generation, and possibly running against the man, Jeb Bush, whose state gave his brother George W. the Presidency.

Realize that only two Presidential nominees ran for and won the Presidency as long as 12 years after being on the national ballot–Henry Clay in 1844 after 1832, and Franklin D. Roosevelt losing as Vice Presidential nominee in 1920 and coming back to win the White House in 1932!

For history and political junkies, the possible scenarios are totally fascinating!

Two Experienced National Presidential Campaigners Who Could Challenge Hillary Clinton For Democratic Presidential Nomination: Al Gore And Jerry Brown!

Ronald Leave a comment

The basic belief that goes around in political circles is that Hillary Clinton has the Democratic Presidential nomination for the asking, and has more experience and background than anyone who could possibly run against her in the primaries, with the major exception of Vice President Joe Biden!

But it is also noted that, actually, there are two very experienced Democrats who have run for President before, along with Hillary and Joe, and yet few are paying any attention to these two men!

I am talking about former Vice President Al Gore, who lost the Presidency in 2000 to George W. Bush, despite having won the national popular vote by about 540,000, but losing the contested election in Florida in the Supreme Court case of Bush V. Gore. Also, Gore sought the Presidency in 1988, before losing the nomination to Michael Dukakis.

I am also referring here to three time Democratic Presidential seeker, California Governor Jerry Brown, who sought the nomination in 1976 and again in 1980 against Jimmy Carter, and against Bill Clinton in 1992!

Both are tested, although both are from “long ago” in many people’s minds, since Gore has never tried for public office since 2000, and sixteen years is a very long time in politics. One could say that Hillary and Joe are also from “long ago”, but they have continued to hold public office consistently since the new century began, with Hillary only “retiring” in 2013 to write her memoir on her years as Secretary of State!

Jerry Brown goes back much further having been Governor of California at age 35, serving from 1975 to 1983; then later being Oakland Mayor and California Attorney General; and then returning to the Governorship 28 years after leaving it, and becoming the oldest Governor in the history of the state in 2011, and now running for a second term at age 76.

There have been rumors that Brown would love to run again, and dog the Clintons, as he did Jimmy Carter. It would be ironic if he was to challenge Hillary as he did her husband in 1992!

Of course, Brown would be nearly 79 were he to become President in 2017, and Al Gore would be nearly 69, just five months younger than Hillary Clinton, while Joe Biden would be 74 at the time of the inauguration!

One might say that having all these “old folks” running or considering the Presidency is disturbing, and add to that mix, two liberals who are rumored to run, If Hillary chooses not to run, or possibly even if she does—Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who would be 67 on Inauguration Day, and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders (technically a Socialist), who would be 75.

While we are at it, why not add Secretary of State John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic Presidential nominee, to the list, with him being 73 if elected to the Presidency in 2016!

These people, all seven of them, represent a lot of talent and experience and brilliance, but ranging from 67 to 79 is NOT a good trend, particularly with the strong likelihood that the Republican Party will nominate someone much younger, probably by a full generation, or close to it, in years!

Irony: Bush V. Gore Attorneys Joined Together To Win Gay Marriage Case In California!

Ronald 1 Comment

It is extremely ironic to realize that the opposing attorneys in the infamous Bush V. Gore case, which George W. Bush won over Al Gore in the Supreme Court, making Bush the 43rd President of the United States, have now triumphed in the most significant civil liberties decision in recent memory, the case against Proposition 8 in California.

This victory in the Supreme Court last month allowed the revival of gay marriages in the most populous state in the Union, with about one out of every eight Americans!

That case, along with the case that declared the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional for its discrimination against gay couples who wished to marry, will stand out in the history of civil rights and civil liberties in America.

And these two heroes are Ted Olson, who represented George W. Bush, and David Boies, who represented Al Gore, and now are joined together in a case that will go down in history as just as important as the Bush V. Gore case, and possibly more so, as the long range effect of winning gay marriage in the Supreme Court is massive!

Sandra Day O’Connor And Second Thoughts on Bush V. Gore: 12 Plus Years Too Late!

Ronald 11 Comments

Former Supreme Court Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has indicated second thoughts about her vote in the infamous Bush V Gore case of December 2000, when the Court decided to intervene in the 2000 Presidential Election controversy between Al Gore and George W. Bush in Florida.

The Supreme Court decided that the vote recount ordered by the Florida State Supreme Court should be halted, giving the victory to Bush, and leading to his election by the miniscule margin of 537 votes, and making him the Electoral College winner by 271-266.

Now, O’Connor has expressed regret that the Court did something it had no precedent to do, decide the election results in a closely competitive contest by far less than one percent of the vote. Where does it state in the Constitution that the Supreme Court should so intervene? The state Supreme Court should have been the final determinant, and possibly, Bush would have won anyway, but at least the Supreme Court would not have done what was a revolutionary precedent!

It could be that O’Connor feels guilt because she is well aware of the disasters that occurred under George W. Bush, and the beginning of the attempt to change his historical image, through the opening of his Presidential Library this week in Dallas, Texas.

We will never know whether Al Gore would have been a better President, but it is hard to believe that he would have been worse than Bush turned out to be!

The Bush V. Gore Attorney Rivals Now On Same Side For Gay Marriage

Ronald 4 Comments

It is ironic that the two attorneys joining forces to fight for gay marriage and call for the rejection of Proposition 8 in California and the Defense of Marriage Act are rivals who fought the case for the 2000 Presidential election contest in the Supreme Court between George W. Bush and Al Gore.

Now, Ted Olson and David Boies are working together after Olson won the case for George W. Bush, but both of them, one Republican and one Democrat, felt that the case for gay marriage was so strong that they were willing to overcome their rivalry, and fight for a basic human right, the right to marry, for all people, not just straight but gay as well!

It demonstrates that there is a case for both Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and progressives, to join together on an issue of fairness, equality, equal protection of the laws, and basic civil rights.

The gay marriage and gay rights movement could not have finer advocates for their cause than these two brilliant attorneys!

The Persecution Of Chief Justice John Roberts Begins: Threats Of 2nd Amendment “Remedies”!

Ronald 1 Comment

Chief Justice John Roberts was a true “profile in courage” this morning in siding with the four Democratic appointees on the Supreme Court, and upholding the Obama Health Care law.

Roberts, despite his other shortcomings in the minds of progressives, including reaffirming the Citizens United case in another case involving Montana this week, has shown open mindedness on the immigration issue, and now on the health care issue.

He is concerned about the image of the Supreme Court, trying to avoid making it an overly partisan body, as it was in the Bush V. Gore case of 2000, which seriously damaged the image of the Supreme Court.

Roberts has a sense of history, and two Harvard Law School professors, Laurence Tribe and Walter Dellinger, correctly came to the conclusion that he would do what he did today.

Roberts, appointed by George W. Bush in 2005, has shown growth and great insight, and if he continued along the road he showed this week on immigration and health care, he could rank among the great Chief Justices by the time he retires in the next 20 years or so, considering he was appointed to the Court at age 50.

It would be great if long term, we could say Roberts ranks with John Jay, John Marshall, Charles Evans Hughes, and Earl Warren. He has begun the first steps along that road!

But he will have to bear severe criticism and bitter attacks from Republicans in Congress, and hateful right wing talk show hosts. He should be proud of defying them, and doing the right thing, and being insulated on the Court, he can suffer the attacks without having to comment on them.

But it is sad and scary that some right wing nuts talk about a Second Amendment “remedy”, implying bloodshed and violence against, maybe, President Obama, or Chief Justice Roberts, or really anyone who believes that all Americans are entitled to good health care!

The government needs to step up infiltration of right wing groups who are actively plotting to bring about a Fascist takeover, and are ready and willing, through militia groups, to plot the death of our leaders for having principles and morals and strong beliefs!

Right now, we can pray for the safety and good health of President Obama, Chief Justice John Roberts, and all good people who believe in humanity, social justice, and common decency!

The John Roberts Legacy Hanging On Tenterhooks As Health Care Decision Nears!

Ronald 2 Comments

Chief Justice John Roberts is reported to be writing the majority opinion for Thursday’s Health Care decision on “ObamaCare”.

Coming on top of his siding with Anthony Kennedy and three liberals on the Court on the immigration case, many observers sense that he and Kennedy will again be in the majority with the four liberals on the Court, and decide in favor of “ObamaCare”.

If Roberts does so, it will transform him immediately into one of the giants of the 17 Chief Justices of the Supreme Court historically.

If he does not do so, he is doomed to a negative role in judicial history, and will be seen by many observers as a failure as a Chief Justice.

The choice is that stark, as this case is the most important since Bush V. Gore, and follows the disastrous Citizens United Case, tragically upheld again yesterday in a Montana case on straight party line and ideology.

Roberts’ reputation is already in trouble, but could be resurrected by an open minded attitude toward health care as covered under the interstate commerce clause.

Roberts, it is said, worries about his and the Court’s reputation, and even if he serves another 20 years, he will never outlive the disappointment and turmoil that will occur if the Court rejects “ObamaCare”.

Since he seems to be a strong believer in federal power, as shown yesterday in the immigration case and the juvenile murderer case, we expect him to come down on the right of the federal government to regulate health care, and require a mandate, a demand that all citizens have health care coverage, if they wish to gain health care when needed, rather than sponging off those of us who have paid for health care.

The actual mandate would be the equivalent of about $15 a week, equivalent of one person having one meal per week at a restaurant, or half a tank of gasoline. Is this too much to ask of all citizens? The answer is NO!

Chief Justice Roberts: We are watching you!