Roberts Court New Take on Consttitution

 

The original constitution, together with its amendments, had a dual purpose; to establish a system for governance and to protect the rights of the non-majority. To achieve these ends Politics and Law had to be balanced and, to a degree, insulated one from the other. Elected representatives make the laws and appointed judges insure that that they do not violate the protections guaranteed by the constitution. This is known as the separation of power.
The Roberts court has erased this essential distinction. The conservative majority of non-elected justices have assumed the role of politicians and have begun to refashion the law to reflect their own political preferences and religious convictions. The court has swept away decades of constraints on the exercise of judicial authority and has ignored the bedrock principle of respect for long established precedent. If this existential threat to democracy is not reversed, this nation is on a doomsday path.

A President Governing from Behind Bars

 If Donald Trump should be elected president while serving time how will he be inaugurated? Will he be given a two-day pass so he can fly to Washington D.C. to take his oath before hurrying back to his cell. Or will Chief Justice Roberts hold the ceremony in the prison’s visitation room?

Will Mr. Trump draft his self-pardon on prison stationery or have his defense lawyer draw it up?
Will the president’s Secret Service unit be housed together with him or be stationed in the adjoining cell?
Tensions with Russia and China seem of little moment compared with these jaw dropping procedural issues.

Republicans Leap to Raise Clinton Email Controversy

 

Those who claim that Hillary Clinton was treated more favorably than Donald Trump, on the issue of mishandling classified documents, have their facts upside down. In reality, though Mrs. Clinton’s dereliction was far less serious or damaging to the national interest than Mr. Trump’s gross misuse and obstruction, the FBI’s politically fraught investigation and disclosures late in the 2016 election cycle surely cost Mrs. Clinton the presidency.
Given the plethora of evidence pointing to Mr. Trump’s criminality, it is neither surprising nor blameworthy that he has been investigated and publicly charged. What is troubling, and somewhat perplexing, is that voters rejected Mrs. Clinton notwithstanding her exoneration but now seem inclined to rally to Mr. Trump as the victim of his own misdeeds.

No less an authority on the importance of safeguarding classified documents than former President Donald Trump, pronounced the appropriate judgment for those who failed that obligation, they are unfit to be the president. Amen.

Should Courts Be More Political

 In an ideal world judges would be chosen and rule without regard to politics. In reality, as Prof. Jedediah Britton-Purdy argues, the judiciary is just another political branch of government. Too often, the selection of judges and the thrust of their decisions reflect their political beliefs.

Taking this as a given, Prof Britton-Purdy urges that democracy is best protected if judicial candidates more openly espouse their constitutional viewpoints and voters can make better informed decisions in selecting those who more closely reflect popular constitutional beliefs.
While Prof. Britton-Purdy’s proposal has the appeal of a practical solution, it points in a dangerous direction. If judging is accepted as merely an alternative exercise of political choosing, the basic belief in a fair and impartial system of justice will be fatally forgotten. Better to keep alive the vision of “courts [as] forums of principle, wisdom and deliberation “which deliver just judgments free of political fervor. While that may be an elusive goal, our historic, democratic precepts require its pursuit.

Reaction to the Durham Report

 

Donald Trump and the rightwing media repeatedly told us that Special Counsel John Durham would issue a blockbuster report exposing a deep state conspiracy to falsely accuse the Trump campaign of colluding with Russia to boost Trump's chances of winning the 2016 presidential election. 

Consistent with his practice, Mr. Durham has issued a report which makes a host of allegations without a scintilla of proof and concludes that no laws were violated. While every respectable legal authority and media outlet recognizes the Durham report for what it is, a nothingburger, Sean Hannity and his Fox News chorus and Republican House members, as might have been predicted, have seized upon the report as, somehow, confirming their allegations of massive criminal activity by Obama officials, the Hillary Clinton campaign and the FBI. 

Once again, the Big Lie strategy is being invoked to mislead the public at large and gratify Trump's MAGA base.

Republican Reaction to the Trump Verdict

 When a jury which included Trump voters speedily reached a unanimous verdict, finding that former president Donald Trump had sexually abused and defamed E.Jean Carroll and demonstrated careful consideration of the facts by finding the evidence of rape insufficient, one would think that all reasonable people would accept the verdict as just and fair. Not so.

At a Trump “town hall” conducted on CNN, which more accurately could be described as a campaign rally, a crowd of Trump supporters, including so-called undeclared voters, laughed and applauded as Mr. Trump repeated his defamatory attack on Ms. Carroll and his whine about witch-hunts.
This sorry spectacle reinforces the fear that, for a substantial segment of the American public and a majority of Republicans, the rule of law and common decency may be irretrievably lost.

Justice Thomas Must Resign

 The mindboggling disregard for ethical standards exhibited by Justice Clarence Thomas is exceeded only by the outrageous indifference shown by Republican politicians and the inaction of Chief Justice John Roberts in failing to react to one of the worst scandals in Supreme Court history.

While the credibility of the court may be beyond redemption, any chance of salvaging even a shred of its moral authority will be lost if Justice Thomas fails to resign and is not then impeached.