Sonia Sotomayor

Two Year Anniversary Of Health Care Law, And Oral Arguments On Case Next Week In Supreme Court

Ronald Leave a comment

The Affordable Care Act, the Obama Health Care legislation, hits its two year anniversary this week, and next week, the US Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of the legislation, seen as the landmark case of the past decade by many, and as the crucial issue that will have a dramatic effect either way on the upcoming Presidential Election of 2012.

The Obama Health Care law has allowed young people to remain on their parents’ health insurance to age 26; has prevented pre-existing conditions from being used to deny health care; and has cut down the “donut hole” for senior citizens in relation to their prescription costs.

Many other reforms must wait until 2014, assuming that the Supreme Court does not declare the whole act unconstitutional.

There is furious action to try to destroy the signature legislation that really defines the Obama Presidency, a law that took a full year to pass, and that was passed on party lines, which is actually not at all unusual in history.

Some federal judges have upheld the legislation, while others have challenged it, and it will be argued by both sides over three days for the unusually long total period of six hours, showing just how significant this case is!

As it seems now, the four “liberal” Justices–Bill Clinton appointees Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, and Barack Obama appointees Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan—will support the legislation.

For it to survive in one piece, at least one of the five “conservative” Justices would have to join the four liberal appointees of Clinton and Obama.

Anthony Kennedy, usually the swing vote, and usually joining the liberals on about one third of the cases before the Court, is thought to be a good bet, but not a guarantee.

Chief Justice John Roberts, who is very aware of the significance of this case for the Court and for his reputation, is thought to join in the majority, but again no certainty.

Ironically, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, who one would think would be opposed, has indicated in other cases as hints that he just might support the legislation.

Associate Justice Samuel Alito is thought less likely to support the legislation, and Associate Justice Clarence Thomas is thought to be the one certain, guaranteed vote against the health care legislation.

The argument for the legislation is the application of the commerce clause of the Constitution, which has been utilized over and over again by the US Supreme Court in the past, adding to the powers of the federal government. This was the same controversy with the Social Security Act, with a conservative oriented Supreme Court in the 1930s, and that legislation was upheld.

The argument against is based on opposition to the so called “mandate” that all citizens MUST obtain health insurance coverage by 2014, or face a fine.

What the critics fail to address is that when someone does not have health insurance and ends up needing medical care, he or she ends up in the emergency room, and all of us have to pay for the health care provided. Is it proper that some have no health care coverage and gain medical aid, and the rest of us have to pay for our health care, and also for those who are irresponsible enough to avoid paying for care that he or she knows he or she can gain for free?

This is the crux of the matter, and it is hoped and believed that a majority of the Supreme Court will end up backing the Health Care law, with a prediction by many of at least 5-4, but even possibly 6-3, or 7-2, or even 8-1.

A victory by more than 5-4 would be a real endorsement of the health care legislation, while a 5-4 defeat would be a major blow to 50 million citizens who benefit from the legislation.

In either case, this decision, when it is announced in June, will have a transformative effect on our nation, and on the Presidential Election of 2012. We will all wait with “baited breath” for the result!

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!

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!

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!

Mainstream Republicans An Endangered Species: Bad Omen For The Future

Ronald Leave a comment

The Republican Party, in its mad dash to the far right, is about to consume its few mainstream members in the US Senate.

Maine Senator Olympia Snowe is facing a likely Tea Party opponent, and Utah Senator Orrin Hatch was booed at the recent CPAC convention, despite his solidly conservative voting record over the past 35 years.

Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown has lost the support of the Tea Party, which originally was thrilled by his winning of Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in 2010, and may also face a primary challenge.

But the repudiation in Indiana of Senator Richard Lugar, the senior Republican and foreign policy expert, by his own party leadership, is a major blow to a Senator who could be called more than a politician, instead a statesman.

Lugar made enemies voting for the START Treaty with Russia, opposing a ban on earmarks, and supporting Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court. He has been called Barack Obama’s favorite Republican.

So Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock, not a Tea Party leader, is challenging Lugar, although it is believed that Governor Mitch Daniels and Indiana Congressman Mike Pence may stay neutral in the primary race due on May 8, 2012.

Will Lugar get the message and decide to retire after 36 years? It seems unlikely, but his loss would be a major blow to moderate conservatism and the future of the Republican Party image nationally.

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! 🙁

Senator Richard Lugar: Endangered By The Tea Party Movement In The Republican Party! :(

Ronald 1 Comment

America benefits by having two strong political parties, which understand that compromise is part of politics, and that “crossing the aisle” to work with the opposition party is not treason!

Unfortunately, with the rise of the Tea Party Movement, the Republican Party has been radicalized to the far right, unwilling to accept any Republican who does not follow the extremist agenda of the Tea Party Movement.

Therefore, Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Olympia Snowe of Maine, and Richard Lugar of Indiana are all facing likely challenges in the primaries in 2012, when they all have a difficult re-election contest for their Senate seats.

The one who seems the most endangered is Lugar, truly one of the rare gems of the Senate.

Lugar is certainly a conservative, but he is a “respectable” conservative willing to cross the aisle and work with Democrats.

Acknowledged as a true expert on American foreign policy, and as a thoughtful individual, the author has always had respect for Senator Lugar, and he is well regarded by his own colleagues, and has often been seen as a potential Secretary of State.

Lugar cooperated with Barack Obama in the Senate on various issues, and just recently, he supported the DREAM Act, the START Treaty with Russia, and voted for both of Obama’s Supreme Court nominees–Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

For this, he has been condemned by Tea Party activists in Indiana, admittedly a state which is much more conservative traditionally than other Midwestern states.

So it seems clear Lugar will have a major primary challenge and might lose his seat, which would be a tremendous loss for his party and the Senate’s reputation.

We need more Richard Lugars in the Senate, if that body is to retain an image of being a serious minded, respectable institution. There are too many firebrand extremists in that legislative body, embarrassing the Republican Party and insuring deadlock and stalemate.

The Evolving Supreme Court: The Dynamics Of Nine Human Beings Working Together!

Ronald Leave a comment

The Supreme Court has undergone a lot of change in the past five years, with four appointments to the Court.

George W. Bush appointed John Roberts as Chief Justice and Samuel Alito as an Associate Justice, while Barack Obama chose Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan as Associate Justices.

Roberts has certainly made his impact as Chief Justice, and has become controversial because of his activism, which contradicts his testimony that he believed in “stare decisis”, the role of precedent in deciding whether to accept past Court decisions. Instead, Roberts has become a confrontational Chief Justice, including criticizing President Obama for attacking the revolutionary Citizens United Case of January, 2010.

Alito seemed to be quieter, but this year, he openly objected to Obama’s criticism of the Citizens United Case, and is now regarded as an outspoken conservative firebrand in the same vein as Roberts, meaning that the four conservatives on the Court are very aggressive in their advocacy. No one would ever accuse Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas as being “wallflowers” in their activist views, even though Scalia claims to be an advocate of “originalism”, interpreting the Constitution based on the actions of the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

But the liberal side of the Court has also been much more outspoken. Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, now the oldest member of the Court, is certainly willing to express her views, and Justice Stephen Breyer is seen as the intellectual leader of the liberal wing of the Court.

But even the newest Justices are making clear their liberal tendencies. Justice Sotomayor is seen by the New York Times as “guiding” the liberal wing. Sotomayor spoke up for prisoner rights, with a challenge by Justice Alito.

And Justice Elena Kagan has joined Sotomayor in what is described as a subtle shift of the Court, with Sotomayor more passionate and Kagan as a “bridge builder”, but yet seen as strengthening the liberal wing. Kagan is seen as having the ability to draw Anthony Kennedy, the truly independent member of the Court, to consider her side of the issue, much like John Paul Stevens used to be able to do that in his latter years on the Court.

What this all means is that the Supreme Court is in constant readjustment of nine human beings, with evolution of the dynamics fascinating to watch and to evaluate on a regular basis! 🙂

Justice Antonin Scalia And Separation Of Powers Seminar To Congressional Conservatives Headed By Michele Bachmann: An Egregious Conflict Of Interest! :(

Ronald Leave a comment

Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, one of the most controversial members of the House of Representatives, one of the leaders of the Tea Party Caucus in the House, and infamous for outrageous statements and actions and for promoting political confrontations, has now gone beyond the pale.

She has decided that members of Congress should take “courses” on the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights, all designed to promote the “conservative” interpretation of these sacred documents.

Anyone serving in Congress should be expected to KNOW these documents by heart, and should NOT be promoting a distorted view of these documents, as Michele Bachmann and her ilk have been doing for years already! And to allow the Tea Party Movement, with its distortion of history and reality, to be the so called “cosponsor” of this series of seminars is even more outrageous!

But it gets worse, as Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, the most conservative member of the Court in the past hundred years, and a promoter of “originalism”–the concept that every legal decision should be based only on 1787 and the Constitutional Convention, with no consideration of modern times or changes in the 223 years since 1787–has agreed to give the first seminar on “separation of powers”!

Does not Justice Scalia realize that “separation of powers” means just that, and that therefore, it is inappropriate for him to be trying to influence or in any other way involve himself with actions of the legislative branch? 🙁

The Supreme Court is supposed to be non-political in nature, but apparently if a conservative such as Scalia wishes to be political, that is alright. And if Justice Clarence Thomas’s wife wishes to become involved in a pressure group that could theoretically have an influence on future cases before the Court, that apparently is fine! 🙁

But imagine if Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, or Elena Kagan were to lecture to a liberal Democratic group or advocate a modernist view to people on Capitol Hill, you can be assured there would be moves to impeach them as having violated “separation of powers”!

This is the double standard, the hypocrisy, of conservatives, Republicans, and the Tea Party Movement, who all claim to be “holier than thou”, when they are engaged in clearcut violations of the Constitution by what they are doing, and what Justice Scalia has agreed to do!

But then, Justice Scalia, as brilliant as he is recognized to be, is also an extremely arrogant man! That sums it up! 🙁