Earl Warren

The REAL Issues Of 2012 That Are Being Ignored In The Presidential Campaign

If one follows the Presidential campaign of 2012, one would think that ONLY the economy matters.

YES, the economy matters, but the newest jobs report demonstrates that this nation is on the mend, and that over the next Presidential term, the economy will recover, with some experts saying that up to 12 million jobs will be created, whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney wins the White House on Tuesday.

Others would say the danger of Iran is the major issue, but even on that, it is clear that both Obama and Romney would react similarly to an actual Iranian attack on Israel or any other part of the Middle East.

So the REAL issues are not the economy or Iran!

Instead, they are the following, although ignored in campaign rhetoric:

Climate Change or Global Warming—the reality of it, as demonstrated yet again by Hurricane Sandy, and the need to take the lead in moving away from oil and coal as the major energy resources. But, of course, Republicans and conservatives deny the reality of this threat, and the oil and coal industries do everything they can to protect themselves at the expense of the nation in the long run.

Gun Violence—as demonstrated by what happened so many times in the past few years, including Tucson, Arizona in 2011 to Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords; the mass murders in the Aurora, Colorado movie complex in 2012; the constant murders in cities such as Chicago, often ignored because the victims are African Americans; and so many other cases. And again, the Republicans and conservatives fight any type of gun control, and allow the National Rifle Association to hold America hostage.

Education—the dire need to promote more people attending and graduating four year colleges and universities. Many would say that having a four year degree does not guarantee that one gets the job he wants or needs. While that is true, the unemployment figures make clear that those with a four year degree or more have an unemployment rate under FOUR percent, while those with less education or dropping out of school have an unemployment rate of TWELVE percent! Is there any evidence other than this to convince parents and children of the urgency of getting an education through a four year degree? And besides, there are intangibles other than just getting a degree for a job, such as improving one’s basic skills of reading, writing, and speaking, and improving one’s mind and knowledge; making one a better person in social situations and parent situations; and raising people up from ignorance, conspiracy theory beliefs, and over reliance on religious doctrine, which unfortunately makes many people unwilling to reason for themselves, and just accept gospel as absolute fact. And of course, Republicans and conservatives argue against extra funding and assistance for education, and would prefer to lean on organized religion to “control” the masses, keep them ignorant, and willing, therefore, to accept ideas without questioning or challenge!

The Supreme Court—not understood by many for the important role it plays, and will continue to play, and the urgency of having a President who will select nominees who wish to look to the future, and not the past, and prevent regression politically, socially, and economically back to the Gilded Age and the 1920s. The Republicans and conservatives and Mitt Romney want more Antonin Scalias, Clarence Thomases, and Samuel Alitos, to insure that we go backward for the next 30 years! So the election of Barack Obama is urgent for the future of constitutional law and the preservation of the advancements of the Earl Warren and Warren Burger Supreme Courts.

These issues mentioned above SHOULD be understood before people, who have not voted before Tuesday, vote for our next President, and the best decision for any sane individual is to vote for the candidate who represents a willingness to deal with the future, President Barack Obama!

The Huffington Post Commemorates POLITICAL ANIMALS Series By Having Readers Vote On Leading “Political Animals”!

Ariana Huffington, the owner of the Huffington Post website, has decided to commemorate the POLITICAL ANIMALS limited cable series on USA Network, starring Sigourney Weaver, as a Hillary Clinton type character, by having a contest among readers as to the top “Political Animals” in American history.

A total of 50 figures of the past and present are included in this “Political Animals” listing.

Let’s look at the list in detail:

The Presidents of the United States listed include: Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton–a total of 10 out of the 50.

African Americans are represented by Frederick Douglass, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King, Jr;, Harriet Tubman, Shirley Chisholm, Malcolm X, Thurgood Marshall, Huey Newton, and Dorothy Height–a total of 9 out of 50.

Women mentioned, other than those listed above include: Hillary Clinton, Eleanor Roosevelt, Mary Harris (Mother Jones), Sandra Day O’Connor, Susan B.Anthony, Dolores Huerta, Frances Perkins, Nancy Pelosi, Margaret Sanger, Emma Goldman, and Gloria Steinem–a total of 11 out of 50.

From the Supreme Court comes Earl Warren and John Roberts, along with Sandra Day O’Connor.

We also have, from the business world, Andrew Carnegie, J P Morgan, and Charles and David Koch (the infamous Koch Brothers).

From the labor world, we have Jimmy Hoffa and Cesar Chavez.

Political operatives include Mark Hanna (connected to William McKinley), James Carville (connected to Bill Clinton), and Karl Rove (connected to George W. Bush).

We also have Presidential candidates or possibilities as follows: Barry Goldwater, Huey Long, Robert La Follette Sr,, William Jennings Bryan, and Eugene Debs.

The final five are gay activist Harvey Milk, Vice President Dick Cheney, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, Ambassador Joseph Kennedy (father of JFK), and newspaper mogul William Randolph Hearst.

This is a very varied list, with plenty of controversy, as to who is on the list, and who has been left off.

There are many ways to rate or rank who are the greatest “Political Animals’, but certainly Presidents would have to be seen as having the edge in a broad sense. although not monopolizing completely.

The author, if pushed to pick the top ten from this list, and not adding others, would conclude as follows in order from Number One to Number Ten, and welcomes debate and discussion by readers:

Franklin D. Roosevelt
Lyndon B. Johnson
Earl Warren
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Abraham Lincoln
Theodore Roosevelt
Robert La Follette Sr.
Thomas Jefferson
Hillary Clinton

As an aside, if the author could add people to the list created by the Huffington Post, he would add the following:

Alexander Hamilton
George Washington
Benjamin Franklin
John Marshall
Henry Clay
Daniel Webster
John C. Calhoun
John Quincy Adams
Carl Schurz
George Norris
Woodrow Wilson
Louis Brandeis
Sam Rayburn
Harry Truman
William Brennan
Nelson Rockefeller
Hubert H. Humphrey
Bob Dole
Ted Kennedy
Thomas “Tip” O’Neill

Again, debate and discussion is welcome!

Will Chief Justice John Roberts Be In The Tradition Of John Marshall, Charles Evans Hughes, And Earl Warren? The Question For The Long Term Future

Chief Justice John Roberts made history in a way that he had to realize would happen, when he broke with the conservative wing of the Court, shocking conservatives and cheering liberals and progressives on the Affordable Care Act, known to its critics as “ObamaCare”.

The question is whether this is a one time aberration, or a beginning of a reconsideration of the philosophy that will govern the future decisions of Chief Justice Roberts.

Has Roberts had an “epiphany”, or did he do this for his own reputation and that of the Court as an institution?

Is Roberts ready to continue to antagonize Associate Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito, two of whom will be likely staying on the Supreme Court for a long period of years, maybe as long as he will?

Does Roberts have a sense of history, and wants to be leagued with other great Chief Justices?

Certainly, seeing the harsh, bitter reaction of many conservative talk show hosts, Republicans and others of the right wing in our politics, might give Roberts pause, and possibly make him reluctant to go against the tide again.

A sign that he will not give in to the attacks would be to push another Citizens United case to be considered by the Court, and this time, to take the proper side for the people of America against the corporations and their power, but who can say that will happen?

In any case, Roberts at least has the potential, if he has the courage and principles to do so, to go down in history as in the tradition of Chief Justices John Marshall (1801-1835), Charles Evans Hughes (1930-1941), and Earl Warren (1953-1969)!

He also has the potential to go down as an “also ran’! It is all up to him, and him alone!

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

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!

Will Mitt Romney Select A Governor As Running Mate? Highly Unlikely!

As the speculation about who Mitt Romney will pick as his running mate picks up, it seems clear that, despite some hints, it is highly unlikely that he will select a Governor or former Governor as his Vice Presidential choice.

The last time that two Governors ran on a Presidential ticket together was 1948, when NY Governor Thomas E. Dewey ran with California Governor Earl Warren, losing to President Harry Truman.

Also, in 1944, Dewey had run against Franklin D. Roosevelt and lost, with Governor John Bricker of Ohio as his Vice Presidential choice.

Those are the only times in the 20th century that two Governors ran together, with the choice otherwise usually being a Senator running as the Vice Presidential choice of a Governor.

So do not expect New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, or former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty to be the choice of Mitt Romney!

58th Anniversary Of Brown V. Board Of Education Case: Most Powerful Decision Of Supreme Court In 20th Century!

Today marks the 58th anniversary of the unanimous Supreme Court decision, Brown V. Board Of Education, mandating the end of public school segregation of the races.

No decision of the Supreme Court in the 20th century has had the impact and longevity that the Brown case brought the nation.

This nation is vastly different as a result of this case, which was brought about by the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren, and the courageous battle in the courts by future Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall, who argued the case for seven year old Linda Brown of Topeka, Kansas.

Many African Americans have benefited from the decision, and a growing middle class has emerged, but even now there are many black children who are denied equal access and facilities, and attempts in many states to resegregate public schools has become a growing problem.

So the battle for civil rights continues, a never ending struggle, since there are always evil forces who wish to set back progress, and deny access to equal educational opportunities in the states and counties of the nation.

Showdowns Between Presidents And The Supreme Court: Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Nixon, And Obama

President Barack Obama today challenged the Supreme Court to support the Obama Health Care legislation, which was argued last week before the Court in an unprecedented three day, six hour presentation by the two sides in the case.

Obama made clear that two conservative Circuit Court judges, Laurence Silberman and Jeffrey Sutton, have backed the legislation as constitutional.

Just by simply answering a question from a journalist, what Obama has done is thrown down the gauntlet to the Court, as he did when he criticized them face to face at the State of the Union Address in 2010, shortly after the decision in the Citizens United case, the most unpopular decision of the Court since Bush V. Gore in 2000.

As the author listened to Obama’s challenge to the Court, it brought back the history of Presidential challenges to the Supreme Court in the past.

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson challenged the Court’s authority, causing antagonism between both Presidents and Chief Justice John Marshall.

Abraham Lincoln was critical of the Dred Scott Decision before his Presidency, and was in conflict with Chief Justice Roger Taney during the Civil War, until Taney’s death in 1864.

Franklin D. Roosevelt denounced the Supreme Court over challenges to the New Deal programs, and tried to “pack” the Court, and Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes defended the Court from the attacks of the President.

Richard Nixon denounced the Court as too liberal and permissive under Chief Justice Earl Warren, when Nixon ran for President, with Warren swearing him in as President, and then retiring later in 1969. Nixon then had the opportunity to make four Supreme Court appointments and turn the Court more conservative.

And now, Barack Obama has challenged the Court for the second time, with Chief Justice John Roberts expressing discontent, after the fact, to the first criticism of the Court, expressed during the State of the Union Address.

Wondering what the ultimate relationship between Obama, and the Chief Justice and the entire Court in the future, will be, is one of the key events of this election year!

Certainly, Obama is in good company, distinguished company, with the other Presidents who have challenged the Supreme Court!

The Supreme Court On Trial IF It Destroys Health Care Reform: Creation Of A Constitutional Crisis

The US Supreme Court is in the midst of a crisis of massive proportions, if it destroys the Obama Health Care reform in June.

It will create a crisis in health care for about 50 million Americans, and affect young adults, senior citizens, and people with pre-existing conditions in a massively negative way.

It will undermine the major effort of the Obama Administration to bring health care into the 21st century, and on the same level as every other democratic nation in the world, many of whom have had national health care for all for decades.

It will also put the Supreme Court as an institution on trial, as it is already perceived as overly partisan, with many of the decisions decided on party line vote, based on which party’s President chose the members of the Court.

It will also make it even more obvious that the election will have the effect of deciding the future direction of the Court, based on which party gains the Presidency and has control of the US Senate. This has always been true, and has been mentioned by this author numerous times on this blog.

This Court could undermine public faith and respect for the institution itself, doing even more damage than the Bush V. Gore case of 2000, and the Citizens United case of 2010.

The Court has been a hot political issue in the past in election years, including:

1800-Thomas Jefferson vs. John Adams, with the power of the Court a key issue, and Adams’ last minute appointment of Chief Justice John Marshall leading, despite opposition of Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe and Andrew Jackson, to a very powerful Supreme Court shaped by Marshall.

1860–The election of Abraham Lincoln, who attacked the Dred Scott decision that stated that a slave owner could take his slave anywhere in the United States, and helping to lead to the secession of the South, and the coming of the Civil War.

1876–An election where the popular vote loser, Rutherford B. Hayes, was chosen by a committee which included five Supreme Court Justices, when no one was able to win the contested electoral votes of three Southern states–Louisiana, South Carolina and Florida.

1912 and 1924–Third party (Progressive Party) candidates Theodore Roosevelt and Robert La Follette, Sr., respectively, proposed limitations on the powers of the Supreme Court .

1936–Franklin D. Roosevelt made the Court an issue because of its constant declaration of New Deal laws as unconstitutional, and tried to “pack” the Court by a proposal to add six new Justices for each one on the Court over the age of 70, an idea soundly defeated in 1937.

1968–Richard Nixon campaigned against the “liberal” Court of Chief Justice Earl Warren, who then had to swear him as President in January 1969, but retired shortly after.

2000–The Supreme Court on a partisan vote stopped the vote count in the state of Florida, thereby awarding George W. Bush the Presidency over Al Gore, with a margin of victory in Florida of 537 votes statewide.

2012 could be another such case of a President confronting a defiant Supreme Court to the will of the majority in Congress and the American people!

The Republican Attack On The Constitution: A Threat To American Democracy!

The Republican Party loves to assert that the Democrats, and progressives in particular, are attacking the Constitution, and that they are the experts on the Constitution.

So therefore, in this Presidential primary season, and in the party membership in Congress, there are statements constantly attacking the court system, anytime that a federal judge or court issues a decision against the conservative view of the Constitution. There are condemnations and calls to change the court system on a regular basis.

One would think that the Democrats and their progressive friends have dominated the courts in recent decades, which, of course, is the exact opposite of the truth!

One forgets that from 1969-2011, there have been only 15 years of Democratic control of the Presidency, as compared to 28 years of Republican control.

The vast majority of federal judges have been Republican appointments, as a result, and Republican Presidents have made a total of 13 Supreme Court appointments over those years, and Democrats have made only 4, two by Bill Clinton and two by Barack Obama!

But now,. Newt Gingrich calls for judges to be required to testify before partisan Congressional committees, a violation of the separation of powers, and a danger to an independent judiciary!

What it comes down to is that Newt Gingrich and all of the Republican opponents, with maybe the exception of Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman, wish to create a court system that would move away from the path breaking changes that the Supreme Court brought about during the years of the Warren Court, Burger Court, and Rehnquist Court including:

Brown V. Board Of Education
Miranda V Arizona
Roe V Wade
University Of California V. Bakke
Lawrence V Texas

As it is, there are threats presented by the Republican growth of dominance on the federal courts to all of these issues–racial integration, rights of criminal suspects, abortion rights, affirmative action, and gay rights.

The Republicans will not be contented until there are reversals on all of these issues, and a return to the “good old days”, when minorities “knew their place”; police had unlimited rights over those they questioned or arrested; women had no control over their reproductive rights; minorities and women had disadvantages, as compared to white males, on educational and job opportunities; and gays were forced to remain “in the closet” and face open discrimination and hate without recourse!

So when the Republicans claim to understand what the Founding Fathers meant at the Constitutional Convention, they are forgetting that those esteemed leaders put into the Constitution the “Elastic Clause” to allow for expansion of the Constitution beyond the original document, in order to make the Constitution a “living document” adaptable to changing times.

The real threat is not what the federal courts have done in the past sixty years! It is the attempt of conservatives and the Republican Party to negate the great progress brought about the Supreme Court and lower courts in the past sixty years, and revert back to the years after World War II, when all of these great changes started slowly to evolve through courageous judges and Supreme Court Justices, including Earl Warren, William Brennan, Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens, Sandra Day O’Connor, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.

57 Years Ago Today, The Most Significant Supreme Court Decision Of The 20th Century!

On this day in 1954, 57 years ago, the United States Supreme Court transformed America in a way never matched by any other decision of the entire 20th century!

The Court unanimously declared racial segregation in public schools unconstitutional in Brown V. Board Of Education Of Topeka, Kansas, a decision that ushered in the civil rights movement, not only in education, but in all areas of American society.

How far we have come, to the point that we have a black President, and have seen the successes of integration in American society to the point that there are many mixed race couples and children, and most Americans don’t even bat an eyelash at the changes that have come about.

Sure, there are still people in America who are racist, and that is true of all races. But the country is much better off for the courage of Chief Justice Earl Warren, who convinced the Justices of the Court of the absolute need for unanimity on the decision, and Associate Justice Hugo Black, who overcame his earlier Ku Klux Klan membership, to do the RIGHT THING!

It is hard to imagine a scenario whereby this decision had not come about, and to believe it possible that segregation would still be the law of the land.

This Brown decision is an example of the best that the Supreme Court has brought us in its 222 plus years of its history, and this is a moment to salute the Court and America for the wonderful event that occurred in 1954, and which we celebrate today!