John Roberts

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!

More Years Of Education, And Yet High Levels Of Ignorance In America Persist!

Ronald 9 Comments

More Americans have graduated high school and attended and graduated two and four year programs at colleges and universities, and yet high levels of ignorance persist in the most advanced nation in the world, or are we?

Examples abound:

40 percent of Americans are not even aware of the signature achievement of the Obama Presidency, what the critics have labeled “ObamaCare”! And some think the Congress repealed it, and others think the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional!

21 percent believe a UFO landed in Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947, and the government has covered it up!

14 percent believe in a monster called Big Foot, that it really exists!

65 percent cannot name even one Supreme Court Justice, not even the Chief Justice, when there are constant references to the “Roberts Court” in the news media!

30 percent cannot name who the Vice President of the United States is, and this has been shown on David Letterman many times!

35 percent do not know which century the American Revolution occurred in, and many cannot name who we fought in the Revolution!

6 percent do not know when Independence Day is, cannot find it on the calendar.

Many Americans cannot find any state of the Union on a geography map, or name the continents!

Many do not know who American fought in World War II, or point out where Korea, Vietnam, Iraq or Afghanistan are on the map, despite the fact that many Americans died in these wars.

Many Americans would be unable to pass the basic citizenship test all immigrants must pass, even though we are all insistent that they must know information many of our citizens born here do NOT know!

And many Americans persist in believing that Barack Obama is a Muslim, and think that Medicare is not a government program, when they say they do not want the government engaged in health care!

Many Americans do not know who their own Congressman or Senators are, and have no clue or understanding of the Constitution or Bill of Rights!

This is all very sad and disturbing, and makes one wonder about the “will of the people”, and their ability to make judgments about what American domestic or foreign policy should be!

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!

ObamaCare At Three Years: A Significant Moment In American History!

Ronald 5 Comments

It has now been three years since ObamaCare became law, and the full extent of the law will take effect in 2014, but already millions of Americans have benefited from the provisions, including children covered to age 26, lower drug costs for seniors, and pre-existing conditions no longer a reason to deny a child or adult’s ability to gain health insurance coverage.

The health insurance companies have raised rates in a desperate attempt to harm ObamaCare, and the Republican House of Representatives has voted 36 times to repeal the health care legislation, but it has all been for show, and there is no way that ObamaCare will be repealed, even if the Republicans gained the Senate in 2014, as the President would be able to veto a repeal, and the GOP could never gain a two thirds override to overcome the Presidential veto.

And any attempt to repeal, were it possible to achieve, would so disrupt the health care being made available to up to 50 million or more people, that it would be a crime to take away what has been gained by those who did not have health care coverage before!

Health care has been transformed forever, thanks to the support of Chief Justice John Roberts, who had the decisive vote last June, and he will go down in history in a positive light, and it is hoped that his views on constitutional matters will become more moderate, and that he will back gay marriage, support continuation of the Voting Rights Act, and take an enlightened position on other issues.

But even if he does not, Roberts has changed the course of history, with the assistance of the four Democratic appointments to the Supreme Court!

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!

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia And “Entitlement” To Voting Rights: An Outrage!

Ronald 10 Comments

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, who has been on the Supreme Court for 27 years now, has become a literal nightmare with so many inappropriate, arrogant statements on and off the Court in the past few years!

His latest outrage was in oral argument on the Voting Rights Act today in the Supreme Court, when he stated that the Voting Rights Act was a “racial entitlement”!

In so stating, he demonstrated that he has learned nothing about past racial discrimination and denial of the right to vote, which necessitated passage of that law in 1965!

With the record of many Republican states, particularly in the South, infamous for past discrimination and Jim Crow segregation laws when they were Democratic states, moving to make it more difficult to vote, as with Florida and Governor Rick Scott as just one example, how can anyone justify getting rid of the requirement of accountability on voting law changes by the federal government?

Voting should not be an “entitlement”, as it is a right that all Americans over the age of 18 should have, and no voter ID laws should be used to disenfranchise anyone, or require a 102 year old woman to have to wait six hours to vote in Florida or anywhere else!

Sadly, the Republican majority Supreme Court is likely to knock down the Voting Rights Act, which will stain the court of Chief Justice John Roberts, if it happens. Roberts’s reputation, improved by his support of ObamaCare last June, rides in the balance of what happens on this, as well as the gay marriage and expansion of the Citizens United cases that are before the Court!

It also could be argued that Scalia may be showing signs of instability at his age of 77 next month, and it will be a great day when this most right wing member of the Court in nearly a century finally retires from the Court at some point in the future!

As Rosa Parks Statue Is Unveiled In The US Capitol, Voting Rights Act Comes Under Review By Supreme Court!

Ronald 7 Comments

This morning, a 9 foot statue of Rosa Parks, the “Mother” of the Civil Rights Movement, for her heroism in allowing herself to become the center of the Montgomery Bus Boycott in 1955-1956, was unveiled in Statuary Hall in the US Capitol Building.

This is a wonderful event to commemorate the greatest human rights movement in American history, and the excitement over how far we have come, with President Barack Obama leading in commemorating the event, and the feeling of satisfaction that we have gone far enough in the half century since 1955, that we have an African American President in his second term in office!

But at the same time, ironically, a challenge by the state of Alabama, which arrested Rosa Parks for refusing to change her seat on a bus in Montgomery, is arguing a case before the Supreme Court today, which if successful, will negate Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which requires nine Southern states and portions of seven other states, which have been shown to be discriminatory in voting regulations in their past, to have to submit any voting law changes to the Justice Department before they can be put into effect.

The argument is that the law is outmoded and no longer necessary, but that is not the case, as last year, there were attempts in many states to make it more difficult for African Americans, Hispanics and Latinos, young people, the elderly, and the poor to be able to register and or vote, plus restrictive days and hours of voting, designed to help Republicans and Mitt Romney gain an unfair advantage in the elections.

Just because Alabama claims the law is no longer needed is belied by history and recent events, and the Congress has renewed the Voting Rights Act multiple times, and it should not be the right of the Supreme Court to repeal a law in effect for nearly a half century!

But this conservative Court just might do that, which would be a miscarriage of justice, and another example of how the Court has started to get out of control of promotion of true justice! Their decision on this case, along with the move to make Citizens United just the beginning of special interest investments to fix elections, and the gay marriage case, will make the Court’s decisions in the next few months extremely significant, and worrisome for those who believe the John Roberts Court is reckless and dangerous, with its conservative majority put on it by Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush!

Conflict Between Presidents And Chief Justices Quite Common Historically

Ronald Leave a comment

It is well known that President Barack Obama and Chief Justice John Roberts do not have a warm relationship, with Roberts chosen by George W. Bush, with Obama voting against his confirmation, and with the two men having totally different ideological views. Despite that, and the annoyance of Roberts over Obama’s condemnation of the Supreme Court for the Citizens United case of 2010, Roberts saved “ObamaCare” in June 2012, legitimizing it for the future, and gaining the anger of Republicans and conservatives. Who can say for sure how the relationship between Obama and Roberts will develop in the second term, and whether Roberts will surprise with more support of the administration than just the health care issue?

But the fact of their antagonism is not new in American history, as it is actually quite common that the Chief Justice is picked by a President of one ideological view, and will often clash with a future President of another party during his tenure on the Court.

The examples of such antagonism, far worse than the Obama-Roberts relationship, follow:

Thomas Jefferson and Chief Justice John Marshall (appointed by John Adams), on the Marbury V Madison case of 1803, dealing with Judicial Review. They were also distant cousins, who personally disliked each other.

Andrew Jackson and Chief Justice John Marshall (appointed by John Adams), on the removal of the Cherokee and other Indian Tribes after the Worcester V. Georgia and other similar cases in the 1830s.

Abraham Lincoln and Chief Justice Roger Taney (appointed by Andrew Jackson), over the Dred Scott V Sanford case in 1857, and the President’s use of war powers during the Civil War years until Taney’s death in 1864.

Franklin D. Roosevelt and Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes (appointed by Herbert Hoover), over Supreme Court decisions during the New Deal years, and specifically FDR’s Court “Packing” Plan in 1937.

Richard Nixon and Chief Justice Earl Warren (appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower), who Nixon had criticized in earlier years, and were rivals in California politics,and Warren trying to leave office under Lyndon B. Johnson, so Nixon would not replace him, but unable to do so due to controversy over Johnson’s nomination of Associate Justice Abe Fortas in 1968, leading to rejection, and Warren’s replacement, Warren Burger, being chosen by Nixon in 1969.

Bill Clinton and Chief Justice William Rehnquist (appointed by Ronald Reagan), who had major disagreements on policy, but Rehnquist conducted himself well at the Bill Clinton Impeachment Trial in 1999.

So the antagonism and rivalry of Presidents and Chief Justices is nothing new!

Chief Justices And The Presidential Oath Of Office

Ronald Leave a comment

Just a day and two away from the next quadrennial historic moment of a Chief Justice giving the oath of office to the President of the United States, it is interesting to look at the history of Chief Justices and Presidents they have sworn in.

The record of the most Presidents sworn in by a Chief Justice is Roger Taney, appointed by Andrew Jackson,who swore into office a total of seven Presidents–Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, James K. Polk, Zachary Taylor, Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, and Abraham Lincoln. And Lincoln was a great antagonist of Taney.

However, Chief Justice John Marshall, appointed by John Adams, had more total swearings into office of Presidents–a total of nine times–Thomas Jefferson twice, James Madison twice, James Monroe twice, John Quincy Adams once, and Andrew Jackson twice. And all but John Quincy Adams were his antagonists.

Then we have Chief Justice William Howard Taft, the 27th President of the United States, who as the appointee of Warren G. Harding, swore in Presidents Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover.

And we have a former Presidential nominee, Charles Evans Hughes, who as Chief Justice, chosen by Herbert Hoover, swore in Franklin D. Roosevelt three times, and was a major antagonist of FDR and his Court “Packing” Plan.

And we have Chief Justice Earl Warren, appointed by Dwight D. Eisenhower, who swore in Ike, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Richard Nixon, with Nixon being a major antagonist of Warren.

Finally, we have Chief Justice John Roberts, who has had a difficult relationship with Barack Obama, and who messed up the Inaugural oath in 2009 and had to redo it the next day for accuracy; made clear his annoyance at Obama’s criticism of the Citizens United decision in his State of the Union Address in 2010; and yet backed ObamaCare in June 2012, legitimizing it for the future and saving it from extinction. Still, Roberts is no “friend” of Obama.

And of course, some extremists talk of impeaching Roberts just for the act of swearing in Obama as President for the second time. But Roberts will not be deterred from his responsibility to do this, although in reality, any Justice or judge could swear in the President of the United States.