Friday, April 09, 2010

Justice Stevens Announces Retirement

The original Constitutional design of the Senate helped to limit the ability of politicians to place their party before their duty. State legislatures could oversee their representatives far better than the electorate, and they ensured that their senators would prevent as much as possible the centralization of power in Washington. Confirmation processes were less partisan and less prone to political grandstanding because they were concerned with the nominees' actual record rather than scoring political points. They also wanted to make sure that any appointees at least understood that the federal government was limited.

The 17th Amendment changed all that. Now the Senate is full of grandstanding politicians who care more about their party than anything. That won't change regardless of what party is in power. The only way to change that is to repeal the 17th Amendment.


xcopfly said...

The post-Bush-II Supreme Court is the most pro-business in history. Unlike our past *free-market* Supreme Courts, which have held the failure of businesses to the same standards as the rest of us, this *pro-business* Supreme Court has been responsible for draconian pro-business rulings such as Eldred and Kelo. Honestly, our court could really use an Obama socialist or two.

JohnJ said...

The 2005 Kelo decision was written before Bush appointed anyone to the Supreme Court. The decision, written by Justice Stevens, and joined by Souter, Kennedy, Ginsberg, and Breyer, was a victory for the "Obama socialists", as you call them. Thomas, O'Connor, Scalia, and Rhenquist dissented.

Get some facts before spouting off an ignorant opinion.

What we need is a Court that will adhere to the Constitution.

xcopfly said...

Ok, sorry about that, but still the court right now is extremely pro-business.

You can't say there will be a Supreme Court that will "adhere" to the Constitution because they have basically taken on the responsibility of defining it.

For example, I'm 99% sure that if a birther case manages to get proven, the Supreme Court will come up with a ruling like "this clause only applies to officials of theocratic/monarchist/Communist/etc. governments" or "this clause lost its relevance after the Lateran Treaty/post-war Italian Republic/Vatican II/etc."

JohnJ said...

I agree with what I think you're saying, which is that as long as the Senate is controlled by political parties, the judges they approve will be too. That's why repealing the 17th Amendment will help get party machinations out of the Senate confirmation process and allow appointees to go through a confirmation process that actually will ensure they will uphold the Constitution and not be obedient to one political party or the other.