Sonia Sotomayor

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!

Supreme Court Bitterly Divided Over Possible Curbing Of Voting Rights Act: A Repeat Of The Compromise Of 1877 Abandonment Of African Americans!

Ronald 6 Comments

It is clear that the Supreme Court is bitterly divided over the Voting Rights Act, which is hanging in the balance after the oral arguments this week, with Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan strongly challenging Justice Antonin Scalia, who said the act was a “racial entitlement”, which demonstrates that Scalia has no understanding of the history of the denial of voting rights, and the need to continue to monitor what those states that have discriminated are now doing.

The Republican Party abandoned African Americans on this day in 1877, when they agreed to the Compromise of 1877, making their candidate for President, Rutherford B. Hayes President, despite the clear cut lead of Democrat Samuel Tilden in popular votes. Part of the deal was for the GOP to stop being the party that had advanced civil rights through two laws during Reconstruction, the creation of the Freedmen’s Bureau, and the passage of three amendments to the Constitution.

The southern states went ahead and continued a policy of discrimination for the next ninety years on voting, and imposing Jim Crow segregation, and the GOP, the majority party until 1932, did nothing about it, due to the deal set up in the Compromise of 1877.

After ninety years, finally, voting rights, supposedly guaranteed under the 15th Amendment, but not enforced, were restored under the Voting Rights Act, but not before civil rights marchers were beaten up, such as Congressman John Lewis of Georgia, and others slaughtered in the name of promoting civil rights in the South.

But along comes Antonin Scalia, who conveniently forgets that even Jews, and also Italians such as himself, were lynched in the South in the near century in which African Americans were denied their basic rights, including voting.

And he wants the Court to become “activist”, when that is precisely what conservatives claim they hate about the Supreme Court. And so therefore, to hell with the overwhelming vote of the Congress to extend the Voting Rights act in 2006, and let’s wipe out all progress and return us to the states “deciding” if any group can vote, instead of “guaranteeing” the right to vote, the basic element of democracy!

So just as the Compromise of 1877 brought us a President who had NOT won the popular vote, and followed through on taking the GOP out of its civil rights activism, so now, two appointments of another President, George W. Bush, not elected by popular vote, and instead put in by a partisan Republican Court including Scalia, shall repeat history and deny Africans Americans the guarantee of the right to vote granted in the 15th Amendment in 1870!

The Humanizing Of The Supreme Court By Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg And Sonia Sotomayor

Ronald 4 Comments

The Supreme Court of the United States is a very “forbidding” institution, with its marble building, opened in 1935, its arches, its tightly controlled public access, and even the robes worn by the nine Supreme Court Justices as they listen to case arguments in the Supreme Court chamber.

The Court has always been seen as an intimidating place, and historically, the Court Justices have made themselves seem distant and aloof from the general public.

But now we are fortunate to have two women on the Court who are particularly open and accessible, and even Associate Justice Elena Kagan has already become much more of a public face, joining Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor in that endeavor.

Ginsburg has, for years, spoken to public school students, given interviews, and made herself the public face of the Court, and now Sotomayor, in particular, and Kagan, somewhat as well, have opened up to the public, with Sotomayor now on a book tour for her revealing autobiography, which makes it easy for average citizens to relate to her and the insecurities she felt as she went from a poor childhood in the Bronx, New York, all the way up the ladder to the Supreme Court.

So two women in particular, and even Kagan moving in that direction, opens up the Court, and it is time for the men on the Court to stop their aloofness and reserve, and show the American people that, while they make judgments on cases as they relate to the Constitution, they are still human beings with real lives and concerns that should not be withheld from public scrutiny.

It would be easier for Americans to respect our system of law and courts if there was more open access to these people, and the women on the Court have done a great service in that regard!

Momentous Day As Supreme Court Chooses To Pass Judgment On Gay Marriage!

Ronald Leave a comment

Today has been a very momentous day, as the United States Supreme Court has chosen to accept two cases on gay marriage, one involving the constitutionality of the Defense Of Marriage Act of 1996, and the other the validity of the passage of Proposition 8 in California, banning gay marriage.

This could be the blockbuster case of the present term, when it is decided in late June of 2013, after oral arguments in March.

This matter brings to mind the Loving V Virginia case of 1967, when the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the right of interracial couples to be able to marry, a very controversial and divisive case in the age of the Civil Rights Movement.

It should be pointed out that many Southerners and Christian religious leaders opposed interracial marriage bitterly, but once it was settled by the Supreme Court, the issue was moot.

The same opposition, heavily Southern and religiously based, is now vehemently against gay marriage, but the tides of history are going against a continuation of discrimination.

If gay marriage is accepted by the Court, after already being legal in nine states, no religious group would be required to marry a gay couple, but they could be married civilly by a judge or county clerk, or hire someone who is legally qualified to marry couples.

The belief is strong that the Court will rule at least 5-4, if not 6-3, for gay marriage rights, with the four Democratic appointments to the Court—Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan—voting for the majority, along with Justice Anthony Kennedy, and possibly Chief Justice John Roberts.

Kennedy is the key vote, but since he supported the right of gays to privacy in the Lawrence V. Texas case in 2003, and was, indeed, the decisive fifth vote, it is believed he will take a step further in support of this major step forward.

Roberts is an unknown quantity, but after his surprising vote for ObamaCare in June, it is believed he might join the majority on this significant case.

So now, ten years later, it looks likely that the Court will have evolved further, and the right of anyone to marry who they love will be guaranteed as a basic civil right.

This is basic social justice, and a majority in public opinion polls, and particularly the younger generation, support gay marriage.

No one is saying that there cannot be people who oppose gay marriage, but society does not have the right to use their prejudices and religious views to deny basic human rights to others!

Scott Brown Vs. Elizabeth Warren: The Key Senate Race Above All Others!

Ronald Leave a comment

Massachusetts Republican Senator Scott Brown is engaged in the most combative Senate race of all against Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren for the Senate seat held for nearly 47 years by Ted Kennedy.

Brown won a surprising victory in the special election in 2010 to succeed Kennedy for the rest of his term, and is the only Republican to represent the state of Massachusetts, which has an all Democratic House delegation, a Democratic Governor, and a dominant Democratic majority in the state legislature.

Brown has had a difficult course to follow, and has tried to come across as moderate, like Maine Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, but he has voted over 90 percent of the time with his party, and has refused to back President Obama on almost anything he asked for, including jobs legislation, and is now acting very aggressively against his opponent, who worked with Obama, and helped to start the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, although GOP Senate opposition prevented her from running this new agency, so she decided to run for the Senate. Brown has come across as in bed with Wall Street, gaining a lot of financial support from top banking and corporate interests.

Elizabeth Warren is an inspiring candidate, who clearly is for the middle class and the poor, and comes across as a hero of progressives, who supports the DREAM Act, which Brown is against, and is clearly a strong Obama supporter who would fight for progressive causes in the manner that Ted Kennedy did for so long!

Their second debate last night in Massachusetts demonstrated that Brown is ready to use rhetoric in a way that is divisive, including his derision of Warren as being a professor who may control her students but not him; saying she is not native American because of her appearance despite her assertions that she is; allowing his staff to make fun of native Americans publicly; and making clear that he considers her a left wing extremist not in the mainstream, as he claims he is. When he said that Antonin Scalia was his favorite Supreme Court Justice, then swung to Anthony Kennedy, John Roberts, and finally Sonia Sotomayor, the audience seemed to turn against him.

The debate brought up the issue that if Brown is reelected, he could decide a Republican majority in the Senate, and would have a dramatic effect on Supreme Court appointments of the next President, and would certainly NOT, based on his record and his rhetoric, be following in the tradition of Ted Kennedy!

This race is crucial to the future of the Obama Presidency in so many ways, and with Obama certain to win the state of Massachusetts, the hope is that he will have adequate coat tails to carry Warren into the Senate as his champion, and have Warren join Bernie Sanders and others in promoting the progressive agenda over the next four years!

The Supreme Court: The MOST Crucial Issue In The Presidential Election Of 2012!

Ronald Leave a comment

Plenty of attention is being paid to economic and domestic policy in the Presidential campaign of 2012.

Also, now with the Middle East crisis that erupted this week, foreign policy is, suddenly, being given tremendous emphasis.

It is right that attention is being paid to both areas of national policy, as they really matter!

But an area which still is NOT being focused on adequately, if in fact at all, is the effect of the election on constitutional matters, which are determined primarily by the Supreme Court of the United States, along with the federal circuit courts.

First, the circuit courts consistently have vacancies, even in a one term Presidency, which can have a dramatic effect on constitutional law. Also, it must be remembered that the tradition has been to appoint Supreme Court Justices from this level of the judiciary, although that was certainly not the norm in the long history of the Supreme Court.

Ultimately, however, it is the Supreme Court which is the final arbiter of the Constitution, as the nine members of the Court, once they have made a determination, rule the day, unless a constitutional amendment can be passed to overrule a Supreme Court decision, or the members of the Court, through changes of personnel, decide to revisit areas of controversy already decided by an earlier Court.

After a decade of no changes on the Court, from 1995 to 2005, suddenly, in a period of five years, from 2005-2010, there were four changes on the Court–Chief Justice John Roberts in 2005 and Associate Justice Samuel Alito in 2006 under President George W. Bush; and Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor in 2009 and Associate Justice Elena Kagan in 2010 under President Barack Obama.

Now in 2012, there are four Justices in their 70s, who are seen as possible or likely retirees from the Court over the next four years—Associate Justice Antonin Scalia (76), appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986; Associate Justice Anothony Kennedy (76), appointed by Reagan in 1988; Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg (79), appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1993; and Associate Justice Stephen Breyer (73), appointed by Clinton in 1994.

By the end of the next term, if none of these four Justices left the Court, they would range in age from 77 to 83!

It seems certain that one or more will retire, or unfortunately, die, in the next four years, and who is appointing their successors, is all important for the future of constitutional law!

If Obama makes one to four appointments, it will, at the least, keep the present balance, slightly toward the conservative side, but if Mitt Romney makes the choices, it could make the Court more conservative, more to the right, than it has been since at least the 1920s, if not the Gilded Age of the late 19th century!

This is NOT a minor matter, considering the areas of criminal justice, affirmative action, abortion, gay rights, and the constitutionality of laws passed under the New Deal of the 1930s and the Great Society of the 1960s, and recent actions on health care, campaign fund raising, and many other touchy, controversial areas of policy, and of civil rights and civil liberties!

The Court could turn back a century of political, social and economic reforms, if it turns in the direction of the far Right, a danger with Mitt Romney in office!

We can expect that by 2020, if not 2016, all of the members of the Court will be those appointed in the previous 15 years, with the possible exception of Associate Justice Clarence Thomas (64), appointed by President George H. W. Bush in 1991, and stating he would not retire or leave the Supreme Court until he breaks the all time record of Associate Justice William O. Douglas, appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1939, and serving 36 years on the Court under seven Presidents, until he left in 1975!

So this issue needs to be addressed in the Presidential debates in October, as it is an issue for voters to consider, and to recognize its significance!

Reality: No Balanced Budget For Long Time, And National Debt Will Continue To Rise!

Ronald Leave a comment

In the midst of all the debates about who is “better” for the country, the team of Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden, or the team of Republicans Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, something is being forgotten or ignored!

There will be no balanced budget for a long time, and the national debt will continue to rise!

There is no magic potion to bring about a balanced budget, or to prevent the national debt from rising!

So whether Barack Obama or Mitt Romney is elected, one will see both the budget issue and the national debt issue continue to be a center of heated debate!

The difference is who will “benefit” from what government does–the middle class and the poor, if Obama wins; or the wealthy top two percent if Romney wins!

But it is more than that!

It is also which man will cause the national defense budget and foreign interventions to grow, adding to our burden, and it is clear that Mitt Romney, with his loose, reckless rhetoric toward Iran, Russia and China, will cause us a lot more financial burden and many more lost American military lives than Barack Obama!

And it is also what direction do we want the nation to go regarding constitutional law! Do we want more Antonin Scalias, Clarence Thomases, and Samuel Alitos? Or do we want more Ruth Bader Ginsbergs, Stephen Breyers, Sonia Sotomayors, and Elena Kagans? This will determine more of the future, economically and socially, than anything else!

It is foreign policy and constitutional law, two areas most people are ignoring, that will have a greater impact on our future than the false argument that, somehow, one or the other candidate for President will, magically, balance the budget, or stop the rise in the national debt, when neither will be able to do anything about either of those matters!

America In 2012: African American President, Irish Catholic Vice President, Mormon Presidential Candidate, Supreme Court Of Catholics, Jews, Women, African American And Hispanic, And The Third Woman Secretary Of State!

Ronald 2 Comments

In the midst of all the turmoil we are going through politically, America should sit back and marvel at how far this nation has come by 2012.

We have an African American President, Barack Obama!

We have an Irish Catholic Vice President, Joe Biden, the only Catholic since John F. Kennedy in 1960.

We have a Mormon Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney.

We have a Supreme Court consisting of six Catholics (Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor) and three Jews (Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan), and also an African American (Clarence Thomas), an Hispanic, (Sonia Sotomayor) and three women (Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan) on the Court.

And we have the third woman Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, after two earlier ones (Madeleine Albright and Condoleezza Rice (one with Jewish heritage and one African American).

So we have a lot to be proud of in 2012, with the tremendous amount of diversity!

One Dark Part Of The Supreme Court Decision On “Obamacare”: Commerce Clause Limited For First Time Since New Deal, Thrilling Libertarians!

Ronald Leave a comment

As one analyzes the Supreme Court decision on “ObamaCare” written by Chief Justice John Roberts, in the midst of the celebration, one has to pause and be concerned about Roberts’ assertion that the “commerce clause”, utilized regularly since the New Deal to permit expansion of federal power, was declared limited by a 5-4 vote of Roberts and all four Republican and conservative appointments on the Court—Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito–and vigorously opposed by the four Democratic and liberal appointments—Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Instead, Roberts said the law was constitutional based on the “mandate” being a tax.

LIbertarians are cheered by this aspect of the case, but it COULD effectively limit federal power, and restore states rights back to the pre 1930s view, which would indeed be tragic in so many ways!

So the battle over the future of government, and over what the Roberts majority opinion means for the long term, will be the subject of much discussion, debate, and cases over the coming years!

Trying To Fathom The Supreme Court On Health Care: The Court Under The Microscope

Ronald Leave a comment

Yesterday’s oral arguments before the Supreme Court led many observers to think that the Court is about to declare the Obama Health Care law unconstitutional this coming June.

Not so fast, ladies and gentlemen! This is hysteria and panic before the fact, with plenty of opportunity after the Court decision, if it is, indeed, negative!

Emphasis was put on Justice Antonin Scalia’s sarcastic comments about mandating broccoli, a totally ridiculous statement! But one must remember that Scalia is a showboat, a maniacal egotist who loves to hear the sound of his own voice, and get everyone’s attention, and one must remember that the Court was issuing an audio of the oral arguments immediately after the event, a very rare circumstance, and that had to be on Scalia’s mind!

Scalia was thought to be a possible vote, but if it is not, so what, as Scalia is, arguably, a hypocrite who is constantly contradictory, utilizing a broad interpretation of the Constitution, when he wishes to, and other times, pontificating on “originalism”, the idea that we must literally follow the Founding Fathers as they saw things in 1787 at the Constitutional Convention.

More importantly, the view of Justice Anthony Kennedy and Chief Justice John Roberts will be the crucial votes, and although Kennedy and Roberts both expressed some reservations about the Obama Health Care bill and the mandate contained within it, there were also key comments by both that indicated a mind open to consideration of the constitutionality of the law.

Kennedy is usually the swing vote, and seemed conflicted, which can be seen as a good sign, and Roberts seemed very evenhanded, and is known to want to be in the majority, and probably write this most important decision of the past decade, and aware that the Supreme Court does not look very good in the eyes of many people based on recent cases, particularly the Citizens United Case of 2010, on top of the Bush V. Gore case of 2000.

The argument is that if Kennedy goes to the majority, then Roberts will join, and the vote would be 6-3.

And one must point out that the four defenders of the legislation were excellent in their arguments supporting the legislation, with Justice Stephen Breyer, a true intellectual, particularly outstanding in his arguments, but joined by Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan.

So, with one more day of oral arguments, it is not time to give up on support of the legislation, and also realize that one cannot always judge how members of the Court will vote, based on oral argument alone, as often, what is being done is to test both sides in the case, and sometimes, purposely mislead on intentions, in the process of asking the lawyers in the case to defend their side.

This decision is far from certain, but progressives should feel optimistic about it at this point, and simply wait patiently to see the result, knowing that the cause is just and compassionate, and that those of us who support it are on the right side of history with Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal and Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society!