The public's growing disdain of the Supreme Court increases the odds that a majority will uphold the constitutionality of Obamacare.
The latest New York Times/CBS poll shows just 44 percent of Americans approve the job the Supreme Court is doing. Fully three-quarters say justices' decisions are sometimes influenced by their personal political views.
The trend is clearly downward. Approval of the Court reached 66 percent in the late 1980s, and by 2000 had slipped to around 50 percent.
As the Times points out, the decline may stem in part from Americans' growing distrust in recent years of major institutions in general and the government in particular.
But it's just as likely to reflect a sense that the Court is more political, especially after it divided in such partisan ways in the 5-4 decisions Bush v. Gore (which decided the 2000 presidential race) and Citizens United (which in 2010 opened the floodgates to unlimited campaign spending).
Americans' diminishing respect for the Court can be heard on the right and left of our increasingly polarized political spectrum.
A few months ago, while a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, Newt Gingrich stated that the political branches were "not bound" by the Supreme Court. Gingrich is known for making bizarre claims. The remarkable thing about this one was the silence with which it was greeted, not only by other Republican hopefuls but also by Democrats.
Last week I was on a left-leaning radio talk show whose host suddenly went on a riff about how the Constitution doesn't really give the Supreme Court the power to overturn laws for being unconstitutional, and it shouldn't have that power.
All this is deeply dangerous for the Court, and for our system of government.
Almost 225 years ago, Alexander Hamilton, writing in the Federalist (Number 78, June 14, 1788) noted the fragility of our third branch of government, whose power rests completely on public respect for its judgement:
The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. [Yet lacking sword or purse, the judiciary] is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice and the public security.
The immediate question is whether the Chief Justice, John Roberts, understands the tenuous position of the Court he now runs. If he does, he'll do whatever he can to avoid another 5-4 split on the upcoming decision over the constitutionality of the Obama healthcare law.
My guess is he'll try to get Anthony Kennedy to join with him and with the four Democratic appointees to uphold the law's constitutionality, relying primarily on an opinion by Judge Laurence Silberman of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia -- a Republican appointee with impeccable conservative credentials, who found the law to be constitutional.
ROBERT B. REICH, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.
Follow Robert Reich on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RBReich
Rep. Keith Ellison: After Wisconsin, a Movement to Get Money Out of Politics
the evidence for that view is certainly not lacking.d
In the past, even though the court was dominated by judges appointed by the republicans, it had always appeared to be unbiased when it came to their judgements and political leanings, at least as a body as a whole. There have always been appointees that have leaned one way or the other but the body itself had been fairly good about impartiality.
It's not true today, it's become obvious to anyone with an ounce of intelligence that the court has become political. I don't know if realization that they are being scrutinized will make a difference, when your leaning so far one way or when you're criticized a persons natural instinct is to become defensive and to hold onto your position even stronger.
I pray that the justices begin to act for the good of the country and stop playing politics.
You're right in that their job is to interpret the constitution and it's relationship to the laws but they must also maintain a legitimacy in order for them to do their jobs and continue with the respect of our nation.
I think that the knowledge of their apparent bias might be enough for some of the justices to examine thier conscience before comeing down with a decision and that decision might surprise those on the right.
Will this happen? I don't know but I certainly hope so.
Both times he made public statements that contained false assertions he later recanted. He clearly overstepped the line separating the Judicial Branch from both the Executive and Congress. The 9 people on the Court were visibly shocked, listened respectfully, and we're embarrassed by Obama. I think on balance the Court will ignore Obama's public disrespect for the Court. He is still a sitting president. After he leaves office, you can be sure they will provide their perspectives of him. My guess it will not be flattering.
All this debate and hand-wringing about ObamaCare and the Supreme Court is irrelevant; the health insurance companies can't survive under ObamaCare but if the Supreme Court strikes down ObamaCare, then Medicare and the current for-profit health care system will soon collapse. 1 in 4 Americans are now uninsured, and our current for-profit system can't sustain itself with those costs.
Whether you like it or not, or can understand it or not, America will adopt a single-payer system. It's just a matter of how long it takes to get there. And when that happens, the health care industry, i.e. doctors, hospitals, etc., only have themselves to blame. Just like some Unions in Wisconsin, they priced themselves out of the market.
And the liberal radio host was correct: the constitution does NOT give the court the power to overturn an act of congress. The notion that it can was established in Marbury v. Madison, which was an unconstitutional grab of power by the supreme court (that they'd disagree is obvious since what they want more than anything is more power).
Quite simply the supreme court is useless. After the Bush v. Gore decision there was no question about the lack of objectivity in the courts' decisions and their partisanship has only grown worse since. In this their credibility mirrors that of the rest of the judicial system, which lets bankers who committed fraud and t _ortu rers in the government go free while it gives a person of color 20 years for a small amount of drugs.
The legal system in this country is a joke and has been for quite some time. The supreme court is simply showing the public it's true self.
Question is: What do we do about it?
In the universe of possible responses, I would not rule out this famous phrase: "To the Barricades."
Wrong. Under the counting standard the Florida court was using at the time Gore would have won by a few hundred votes.
The NYT did a recount with differing standards (whether one counts "hanging chads" or not, etc...) and found Bush winning during about half of the different possible counting standards.
But it doesn't change the fact that if the Supreme Court hadn't stopped the Florida recount Al Gore would have been president.
___
Was that Thom Hartman? I think I've heard him make that argument, and I was flabbergasted.
Most recent Obama approval rating: 47%
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
Most recent polling on approval of Obamacare: 36%
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/06/poll-only-36-percent-of-americans-support-the-affordable-care-act/258038/
I don't see that the SCOTUS is under any more of a threat than anyone else.
And as Bill Murray once said in Meatballs, IT JUST DOESN'T MATTER.
The more ALL branches of government discredit themselves with the US electorate, the stronger the Tea Party will become.
It's PROGRESSIVE'S who need people to love big government. The conservatives would be just as happy if they didn't.
A plurality want it to go away altogether. A smaller number just want the mandate to go away. Only about a third want it at all.....
Many see it as a "Metastasizing Cancer" within the GOP.