John Marshall

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

Ronald Leave a comment

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!

Birthday Of The Most Misunderstood And Underappreciated Founding Father: Alexander Hamilton!

Ronald Leave a comment

On this day, January 11, in either 1755 or 1757, depending on which historical records one believes, Alexander Hamilton was born in the British West Indies.

Hamilton went on to a life of success, migrating to the American colonies, serving George Washington in the American Revolution, being a delegate to the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in Philadelphia, becoming President Washington’s first Secretary of the Treasury, founding the first political party (the Federalists), and promoting what has become the “liberal” interpretation of the Constitution (although it was termed “conservative” at the time).

Hamilton was always controversial, outspoken, opinionated, egotistical, and had so called “skeletons in his closet” regarding his financial and love lives.

But he saved the country during its early years under George Washington with his policies of paying off the national and state debts. He developed the broad interpretation of the Constitution, utilized later by Chief Justice John Marshall and the Supreme Court in the doctrine of “judicial review”. He developed the US Mint; the US Coast Guard; emphasized the importance of manufacturing and industry in the American economy alongside agriculture; started the Bank of New York; and developed the oldest continually published newspaper in America, the New York Post.

Hamilton would be tragically killed by Vice President Aaron Burr in an infamous gun duel in New Jersey in the summer of 1804, dying at the young age of 47 or 49, and remains one of the tragic losses of a young politico, alongside John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. among others.

It is hard to imagine how America would have evolved without the contributions of Alexander Hamilton!

Newt Gingrich’s Attack On Activist Judges: Hypocrisy, Since Only Against Progressive “Activists” But NOT Conservative “Activists”!

Ronald 1 Comment

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is already showing signs of decline from his “surge” two weeks ago!

Not soon enough, as Gingrich is declaring “war” on “activist” judges, but is totally hypocritical in that he is only attacking “progressive” activists, and not “conservative” activists!

He would wish for a court system which was one sided, only promoting conservative advocacy, and setting America back to the 19th century Gilded Age!

He claims to know history, since he has a History Ph.D. from Tulane University in European History, but he boasts too much of his knowledge about American History and the American Constitution!

If it was up to Gingrich, he would wipe out Warren and Burger Court decisions that have transformed this country politically and socially, and really would wish to wipe out the “judicial review” established by the Supreme Court under John Marshall in the early 19th century!

To claim that only “progressives” are activists is totally ridiculous, as ALL Justices are “activist” in different ways, as they are INTERPRETING the Constitution, which is meant to be a “living” document, adaptable to changing times!

Just one example of conservative “activism” on the Supreme Court is Bush V Gore, where the conservative majority Court in 2000 decided to intervene, stop the ballot recount in Florida, and decided the Presidential Election Of 2000. What gave them the right to do that? And look at what it led to, eight years of foreign and domestic disasters that will reverberate for many generations on our nation!

So Gingrich, as usual, is acting as a demagogue, also demonstrated by his demand that lower federal court judges be required to explain their decisions to the Congress in committees, or be arrested! What a revolutionary, radical grab of power such a requirement would be!

Presidential Challenges To The Power Of The Supreme Court: From Jefferson To Obama

Ronald Leave a comment

As the author reflected on yesterday, the 150th Anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration as President of the United States and his taking the oath of office from Chief Justice Roger Taney, he thought of the tremendous rivalry which existed between the Taney Court and Lincoln regarding the Dred Scott Case of 1857, which asserted that a slave was property and could be taken anywhere in the nation by his or her slave owner.

And the recognition of rivalry and opposition by many Presidents to the Supreme Court during their terms of office came to mind.

Thomas Jefferson was a great rival of his cousin, Chief Justice John Marshall, and bitterly opposed the Court’s decision in Marbury V. Madison, which established the concept of judicial review. Jefferson also tried very diligently to remove Associate Justice Samuel Chase by impeachment from the Supreme Court, which ultimately failed in 1805.

Abraham Lincoln bitterly disagreed with the Dred Scott V. Sanford case of 1857, and was a constant rival of Chief Justice Taney during the years of the Civil War, as Taney and his Court made efforts to weaken Lincoln’s war powers until his death in 1864, an event applauded by many members of Lincoln’s Republican Party.

Theodore Roosevelt often spoke of the need to transform the Supreme Court, and specifically called for a constitutional amendment to limit the tenure of Supreme Court Justices while campaigning on the Progressive Party line in 1912, and was critical of Supreme Court decisions that he thought were bad for the nation.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was highly critical of Supreme Court decisions that limited the New Deal programs, and advocated a “reorganization” of the Court in 1937, which would permit the appointment of six new Justices, one for each Justice over the age of 70, a plan called an attempt to “pack the Court” by its critics who defeated it.

And now, Barack Obama has been highly critical of the Supreme Court in the Citizens United Case, which certainly both Roosevelts would have joined him in opposing the unlimited power of corporations to contribute to political campaigns, an idea which became law in the Progressive Era, and now has been upended after nearly a hundred years by the John Roberts Court!

So challenges to the power of the Supreme Court have occurred under many Presidents, and most specifically, under those in the past considered to be among our greatest Presidents–Jefferson, Lincoln, TR, and FDR. Barack Obama is joining great company indeed!

Tea Party People And Conservatives Take Note: The Constitution Established A Strong National Government, And The Amendments Have Made For A More Liberal, Nationalist Nation!

Ronald Leave a comment

Tomorrow, the House of Representatives is spending taxpayer money to read the Constitution out loud, as a supposed lesson to the nation as to what the Constitution contains.

This is occurring due to the impact of the Tea Party Movement, but if that group and other conservatives really listen to and think about the words of the Constitution, they would realize what the Constitution is all about.

The Constitution was created to REPLACE the Articles of Confederation, a document that gave the states authority that led to chaos, anarchy and bankruptcy, and forced the hand of liberal nationalist Founding Fathers who realized that the country would not survive without a STRONGER NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.

The Constitution gave the US Congress tremendous and specific powers in Article 1, Section 8, the ELASTIC CLAUSE–necessary and proper for the common defense and the general welfare–, creating vague language that could be interpreted broadly, and has been by the Supreme Court over 200 years since the time of Chief Justice John Marshall.

Liberal nationalists brought about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights!

Liberal nationalists brought about the Civil Rights Amendments (13, 14, 15) in the years after the Civil War.

Liberal nationalists brought about the “Progressive” amendments on the federal income tax (16), direct election of the US Senate taken away from the state legislatures (17), and woman suffrage (19) in the second decade of the 20th century.

Liberal nationalists brought about the right of DC residents to vote for President (23), the end of the poll tax in all elections (24), and the 18 year old vote (26) in the decade of the mid to late 1960s and early 1970s.

The Constitution has been made the great document it is by the actions of the Founding Fathers and later generations of liberal nationalists, whether Federalist, Republican, or Democratic, and by Supreme Courts led by great Justices, including John Marshall, Louis Brandeis, Benjamin Cardozo, William O. Douglas, Earl Warren, William Brennan, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens and many others!

No matter what conservatives, Republicans, and Tea Party activists might say or believe, it is LIBERAL and PROGRESSIVE activism that has led to the Constitution and its amendment improvements over two centuries!

Liberals and progressives stand together in pride as to their enactment and expansion of the document which inspires people all over the world, the greatest constitutional document ever created by the will of mankind!

The Constitution And Health Care: “Necessary And Proper” Clause At Work!

Ronald 1 Comment

Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution allows the Congress very broad authority to pass laws seen as “necessary and proper” for the “general welfare”.

Federal District Court Judge Henry Hudson of Virginia invalidated the “necessary and proper” clause in stating that the insurance mandate of the health care legislation is unconstitutional. At the same time, two other federal district court judges have upheld the insurance mandate.

The argument of the government is that failure to buy insurance passes the expenses on to the government, hospitals, and the privately insured, and that puts an unfair burden on others because of the irresponsibility of individual citizens. Also, the insurance mandate prevents discrimination by insurers against those with pre-existing medical conditions, an important part of the new legislation.

The whole controversy reverts back to the great Chief Justice John Marshall, who established the broad powers of Article 1, Section 8, in the famous McCulloch V. Maryland case of 1823, having to do with the constitutionality of the National Bank.

As Marshall wrote: “Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional.”

The Health Care legislation will probably reach the Supreme Court in the year 2012, possibly in time for the Presidential Election of 2012, which, if won by President Obama, will surely institutionalize the Health care legislation with some fine tuning in the meantime.

Realize that the furious opposition to the Health Care legislation represents the similar reaction to the Social Security Act of 1935 and the Medicare Act of 1965, but which has been often forgotten because of the universal support of both laws over time, the basis of the safety net that makes America a more humane society, even if the opponents have worked to prevent such a situation!