Is the right wing going for the jugular, setting up a Supreme Court slap-down of Obama and his crowning achievement?
As the healthcare reform legislation was signed, 13 state attorneys general proceeded to sue to stop the bill.
Filings have begun. The Idaho AG told Chris Matthews that he expected it will take 11-13 months to reach the Supreme court. By then, the Republicans may have enough people in the senate to block ANY appointee Obama designates.
The rogue five right wing radical extremists who are running the reputation of the Supreme Court into cesspool territory could decide on whether the congressional vote on Health Care goes into law.
They crowned George Bush president, brazenly violating separations of powers laws. They turned the US election system into a corporatocracy, corrupting the election process, perhaps irreparably. It may seem unlikely that the Supreme court would try to over-rule congress-- that it would go against the constitution's separation of powers rules. But the radical Supreme Court right wingers have already proven that they don't respect precedent or the constitution. Some of them, like Alito and Roberts, lied their way into their jobs, testifying they would not engage in legislation from the bench, that they would respect Stare Decisis. Some have called for their impeachment because of those lies -- not likely with Nancy Pelosi running the House.
I asked a few attorneys their take. Here's the question I presented to them:
I'm working on an article speculating that the Supreme Court could ultimately decide whether the Obama healthcare legislation is enacted.
Two state Attorney generals have already said they'll sue the government if it passes. After the activism we've already seen from the SCOTUS, it would not be beyond the imagination for them to accept the case, then rule that the process the Democratic congress used was unconstitutional -- since they seem to have no problem breaching the bounds of separation of powers. What's your take?
Michael Ratner, attorney and president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, one of the first attorneys to defend Guantanamo prisoners, replied:
I don't know the issue that well. But as bad as Roberts is and much of the court, the general rule is that they will not interfere in how the Congress conducts itself on these matters -- so I don't think such a suit would be successful.
I asked the same question of Marjorie Cohn, immediate past president of the National Lawyers Guild, and she replied, "The Court will strike down laws Congress passes but I doubt it would get involved in micromanaging how Congress does its business."
I countered with this question, "And would you have said the same thing before the SCOTUS handed Bush the presidency?"
Ratner replied, with his last remark, perhaps, being the most telling:
Not really the same taking on this health bill--assuming it passes-- would be a direct interference with how congress does its business and an intervention would be very unusual to say the least on that issue. But of course everything is up for grabs with this court.
To this, Cohn replied: "Bush v Gore was an anomaly and didn't involve getting into how Congress does its business. The AGs can file their suits but I doubt the Court will hear the case. I could be wrong."
I put the two questions, combined, to attorney Andrew Kreig, executive director of the Justice Integrity Project, who said:
I agree. Bush v gore is the new legal standard and there is scant fight in most of the so called liberals, who are really centrists.
Brent Budowski, pundit and former legislative staffer for Lloyd Bentsen, commented, in response to my speculation, "I would put a one in five possibility that they (SCOTUS) through out the mandate (required payment for insurance) as unconstitutional. They would just through out whatever they throw out and leave the rest, and the mandate is most vulnerable. With the current Supreme Court, it's always a crapshoot.
It's hard for some of these attorneys to imagine justices on the Supreme Court breaking precedent, breaking legal standards and even violating the constitution, but clearly, not entirely beyond the range of possibilities they consider.
Jane Hamsher reported to me, in an interview last week, that there were 36 challenges to the bill already. She told me that Virginia already passed a law, challenging the law, saying they would not abide by the mandate. Hamsher told me that challenging the bill is going to be the Gay Marriage of 2010. "
Hamsher's "Gay Marriage of 2010" take is a political one. But the right wing uses claws and fangs to go for the kill. They've used the five troglodyte majority they have on the Supreme Court to dismantle century old precedent. I think they'll try to castrate the Democratic congress's health reform bill -- they've been incredibly effective at making the Senate Democrats impotent already.
The movement of the right towards taking health reform to the Supreme court has already started with the lawsuits and laws passed challenging the legislation. This WILL be on the table, whether the Democrats like it or not, whether it has been done before, whether it is legal or not. The Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Kennedy axis of right wing evil has shown they care not about precedent and are willing to re-draft huge volumes of the constitution. They have shown themselves to be willing and able to be dangerous to democracy and the separation of powers.
They have gone this way because Obama, Pelosi and the Democratic leaders have proven to be spineless in the face of high level crime and corruption. Alito should at least be questioned, with hearings held, considering impeachment, for lying to congress about his stare decesis intentions. It is not too late to visit the illegal actions of Bush appointees like Leura Canary and others in the DOJ. If the Democrats don't fight back hard, we will see the power the electorate endowed them with melt away. Power unused is not just power abdicated and thrown away. The failure to use Power given by the people is a betrayal of the people's faith and trust. When power is given and un-used the people have every reason not to trust those to who it was endowed.
The Democrats have a bit more than six months to find and use the power they were given. They must act and not react. They must strike boldly against the right wingers who have, so far, out-messaged them. They can do it, but it requires leadership that we have not yet seen. Obama, Reid and Pelosi must appoint political generals to engage in battle. It's not the health care bill at stake. It's an epochal change in the balance of power in America.
Follow Rob Kall on Twitter: www.twitter.com/robkall
If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions. - James Madison
[O]ur tenet ever was, and, indeed, it is almost the only landmark which now divides the federalists from the republicans, that Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action; consequently, that the specification of powers is a limitation of the purposes for which they may raise money. - Thomas Jefferson
With respect to the words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. – James Madison
I cannot undertake to lay my finger upon an article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents. – James Madison
You will have to pardon me, but I don't think the lot of you has any idea about what freedom is and you certainly have no clue to the intents of the constitution. Shame on you Obama.
Just as most dissenters of this paradigm shift would now cringe at owning a slave or support relegating their mothers to second class citizens, unable to vote or own land….in 50 years, as the naysayers of this bill die off, Americans will look back and study the era feeling gratitude and embarrassment that it took so long for that enlightenment to take place in this country.
And as with all paradigm shifts, this healthcare bill is just a beginning. It is far from perfect and does not address all the needs for reform. More needs to evolve from this hard fought beginning.
Finally, the only indigenous nationalities in this continent are the First Nations of the Americas. We are all offspring of immigrants. And truth be known, most of us have someone in our ancestry who slipped into this country illegally.
But, given how we treated the First Nations in the US (versus the Canadians), & the blacks...and women… is it any wonder we have turned the closed mindedness onto ourselves. After all, there is no one else left to abuse.
There is nothing enlightening about this, and there is a very specific word that describes what this is:
Define: fascism - "A political regime, having totalitarian aspirations, ideologically based on a relationship between business and the centralized government, business-and-government control of the market place, repression of criticism or opposition, a leader cult and exalting the state and/or religion above individual rights. Originally only applied (usually capitalized) to Benito Mussolini's Italy."
You really think that you are enlightened? You just supported the violation of millions of peoples well being. No matter what words you use to attempt to justify and distort what you have done, you have violated millions of peoples individual right and imposed your will upon them.
Congratulations.
This health care reform is bad because government bureaucracy and politics have proven time and time again that political expediency is more important than prudent business decisions. There is a reason that Amtrak, the Post Office, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are in financial trouble ... it is specifically because of government mis-management.
The reason this reform is bad is because current health care resources will be wasted by the government and our over all quality of care will go down. On top of that, you just lost the freedom to choose how to best care for yourself, but you probably don't understand that subtle but powerful point.
they go even further, sinking to all time benchmarks of low.
THIS SCOTUS as it stands now, was structured to give every advantage to
corporate power.
I agree that it is time to take off the gloves and launch the greatest anti-corruption
crackdown in U.S. history.
We might even be able to help a few people once we throw some of the high crimers
into prison and seize their assets, to be sold at public auction for charity.
They appointed one PotUS/CiC ... maybe they'll ham-string this one?