I hope your last 'graph is prophetic. I fear it will only be apsirational.
I will wait; I suppose have to. I would be pleased if a bit of the chaos that tickles the heart of the universe made Neil Gorsuch, like this past election, an entirely unexpected event.
Ginsburg, Kennedy, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan do not have "a disinterested devotion to the rule of law". They have a militant, virulent devotion to leftism/feminism.
1
Wow, that is a concise summary of a complex construct. You must know a lot to caricature with such apparent confidence. Upon what plinth do you place this précis? Surprise me, and get past the bile. Perhaps you are a retired judge with profound gifts of interpretation who has discerned a commonality to the opinions of these justices that no other competent authority has seen.
5
I agree with you on all but Kennedy. He and Roberts are the only justices left of a once august institution. And, yes, Scalia was perhaps the worst political operative clown in the history of the High Court, making him not even fit for the name "Jusitce."
1
Article calls him the 113th justice. SCOTUS press release calls him the 101st justice. Which is it?
it's both. the scotus release refers to "associate justices" and the article refers to justices (both associate and chief). there have been 113 justices including chief justices. there have been 17 chief justices but 5 of them were previously associate justices, meaning 12 justices who have only been a chief justice and another 101 that have been associate justices.
3
The negativity held by countless Americans about American government has reached a level of dysfunction that can't be cured by the usual bromides. The final question has now become "Can you think of anything positive to say about the United States?" usually followed by a very long pause.
If we Americans follow the words of former Times writer Chris Hedges regarding the prognosis for our country, we need to prepare ourselves for the final decline of the American Empire. Hedges believes this pattern is inevitable once the culture has been devoured by oligarchs who end up selling off every last vestige of a 200 year old democracy in the name of capitalism.
His lesson is that the struggle against unfettered capitalism is hopeless because most citizens have been duped by all three branches of government into accepting their lot in life and that to struggle is hopeless.
As I began with, negativity in the general population is slowly smothering what is left of America's independent thought. Trump is overseeing the death throes of what's left of America. Would the last one leaving please turn out the light?
If we Americans follow the words of former Times writer Chris Hedges regarding the prognosis for our country, we need to prepare ourselves for the final decline of the American Empire. Hedges believes this pattern is inevitable once the culture has been devoured by oligarchs who end up selling off every last vestige of a 200 year old democracy in the name of capitalism.
His lesson is that the struggle against unfettered capitalism is hopeless because most citizens have been duped by all three branches of government into accepting their lot in life and that to struggle is hopeless.
As I began with, negativity in the general population is slowly smothering what is left of America's independent thought. Trump is overseeing the death throes of what's left of America. Would the last one leaving please turn out the light?
6
Sadly, I agree with you, unless Congress comes to its senses. We have weathered my storms. Is that still possible?
1
Blame all this mess on Senator Ted Kennedy . His false and outrageous attack on Judge Robert Bork started the politicalization of Sumpreme Court judges . King Anthony Kennedy may not have ever been on the court were Bork not humiliated and rejected by the Senate with Kennedy leading the lynch mob . Bork actually was honest and forthcoming in his answers to the Senators and his rejection cautioned other nominees to keep their mouths shut and be very vague . Remember then Judge Ruth Ginsberg 's " no hints " answers during her confirmation ?
Lastly , the Republicans FINALLY learned to play true gangster politics by not holding a hearing on Garland . Good for them ! If warmonger McCain and ashamed of his wealth Romney knew even the basics of gangster politics - which I learned growing up in Chicago - they may have won the Presidency .
Lastly , the Republicans FINALLY learned to play true gangster politics by not holding a hearing on Garland . Good for them ! If warmonger McCain and ashamed of his wealth Romney knew even the basics of gangster politics - which I learned growing up in Chicago - they may have won the Presidency .
2
D.G. - Too bad you didn't learn any law, constitutional principles, civics or human values. But your learning fits in perfectly with the GOP and Trump.
Bork got a hearing (small detail to a gangster I guess) and gave some really bad answers. Blame that on Ted if it makes you a happier "gangster."
Bork got a hearing (small detail to a gangster I guess) and gave some really bad answers. Blame that on Ted if it makes you a happier "gangster."
7
Ah, the Bork hearings. Robert Bork was forthcoming, and honest to the extent that he understood the questions. Of course he was not really in a position to play the 'I just can't talk about that' card, because the volume and specificity of his writings and the prescriptive implications made that route a somewhat disingenuous path. Advise and consent does not limit itself to simple legal qualification.
Ignoring the fact that it is filled with inaccuracies, oversimplifications, and bald-faced opinion, it is hard to get from your statement to any sense that any opinions other than your own have value in America. I felt disenfranchised by McConnell's refusal to hold hearings. You did not? Would that statement hold for you were the roles reversed? I did not agree with Harry Reid, by the way. In face of the failure to review and seat justices that was taking place at the time, Chief Justice Roberts should have shut the entire Judicial Branch down. He is the head of one third and the American system of government. When the other Branches start poking their intromittent organs at the court fundament, it is his responsibility to step in. I would say the failure is his, but you could argue that previous Chief Justices could have been a lot more vocal.
Ignoring the fact that it is filled with inaccuracies, oversimplifications, and bald-faced opinion, it is hard to get from your statement to any sense that any opinions other than your own have value in America. I felt disenfranchised by McConnell's refusal to hold hearings. You did not? Would that statement hold for you were the roles reversed? I did not agree with Harry Reid, by the way. In face of the failure to review and seat justices that was taking place at the time, Chief Justice Roberts should have shut the entire Judicial Branch down. He is the head of one third and the American system of government. When the other Branches start poking their intromittent organs at the court fundament, it is his responsibility to step in. I would say the failure is his, but you could argue that previous Chief Justices could have been a lot more vocal.
4
I listened to nearly all of the Bork hearings on the radio; and many of his answers were pretty outrageous. He thought nothing of individual liberties, rights, privacy, etc. His opinions were offensive to anyone who thinks they have any real rights as an American, and he totally deserved to be rejected.
3
there is no "honorable" in the supreme court seat now held by neil gorsuch.
12
I am a democrat, but my party is really worrying me. From the anti-free speech leftists, to the marxist progressives, it is hard to hold my nose and vote Republican. but I will because at least Republicans aren't leading us into a dead end. The Republicans just have bad policy prescriptions for achieving their goals. The democrats have gone whacko. I am glad that the court is 5-4 in favor of conservatives. The progressive court members don't give one bit about the constitution. Anything that is good for progressives is deemed okay. Anything that is good for Republicans is deemed evil. Not a good way to run a country or to get elected.
If the attitude is anything progressive is good and anything non-progressive is evil, bigoted, racist, xenophobic, and non-sustainable, then you can count on not being elected.
If the attitude is anything progressive is good and anything non-progressive is evil, bigoted, racist, xenophobic, and non-sustainable, then you can count on not being elected.
3
"The republicans aren't leading us into a dead end". Oh, the vision of the blind. Trump is sending an armada toward North Korea. His bombing in Syria has caused reminders that no Syrian refugees are allowed in this country. He has in one stroke allowed Tillerson [not a mental diplomatic genius ] serious problems trying to communicate with Putin. He has insulted Angela Merkl of Germany. He has insulted our trusted ally Australia....ad infinitum. The republicans are leading us into the most perilous time since Hitler's rise to power. Not the end, just the beginning.
3
Then do something about YOUR party.
The Republican goals are largely reduced to what ever it takes to stay in power. They face a demographic wave with, so far, nothing to offer but anger, hatred, and deceipt. I have watched their decent for decades, and with great dismay. A conservative viewpoint offers routes to problem solutions that I can easily support. It can provide much the more pragmatic platform. Alas, they have essentially no new ideas, almost no flexibility, and are in thrall to fear and avarice. Sadly, they are pretty successful at propaganda, but then betting against tribalism is tough. The (manifold) sins of the Democratic Party are far more forgivable.
The Republican goals are largely reduced to what ever it takes to stay in power. They face a demographic wave with, so far, nothing to offer but anger, hatred, and deceipt. I have watched their decent for decades, and with great dismay. A conservative viewpoint offers routes to problem solutions that I can easily support. It can provide much the more pragmatic platform. Alas, they have essentially no new ideas, almost no flexibility, and are in thrall to fear and avarice. Sadly, they are pretty successful at propaganda, but then betting against tribalism is tough. The (manifold) sins of the Democratic Party are far more forgivable.
3
"Republicans aren't leading us into a dead end"
Perhaps they're merely sinking you in a swamp.
"From the anti-free speech leftists ..."
The occasional campus contretemps does not amount to the Democratic Party opposing free speech.
Bannon says the media should "keep its mouth shut". Trump says the news media "is [sic] the enemy of the American People!". This is the Republicans standing up for free speech?!
Perhaps they're merely sinking you in a swamp.
"From the anti-free speech leftists ..."
The occasional campus contretemps does not amount to the Democratic Party opposing free speech.
Bannon says the media should "keep its mouth shut". Trump says the news media "is [sic] the enemy of the American People!". This is the Republicans standing up for free speech?!
3
Like RKD, I also want to know how McConnell became such a warped human being.
7
The bloodless coup perpetrated by the Republican Senate sounds so very, very civilized. Move along. Nothing to see here.
9
How will I ever come to think the new Justice on the Supreme Court is legitimate.
8
The father of a childhood friend was a US Court of Appeals judge and I recall many dinner-table conversations about the issues of the day. He moderated them all and took every side to challenge our ideas. I once asked my friend if her father was a Democrat or a Republican. She said she didn't know, and we certainly couldn't tell by his conversations. That was a long time ago.
9
"Things will now return to normal for the court". I don't see how that is possible following the disgraceful process that Republican Senators followed to bring Judge Gorsuch to the bench.
First of all, under Republican control, the Senate refused to perform its constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on Judge Garland's nomination. They ignored the fact that this was part of their solemn duty as Senators. They ignored the fact that President Obama had been elected twice and that in both elections he won the popular vote as well as the Electoral College vote. They ignored the fact that he had almost a full year left in his term.
Next, Republican senators tried to intimidate the Democratic senators by threatening to deploy the 'nuclear option' if the Democrats tried to block the nomination. When the Democrats refused to be silenced, the Republicans went ahead and changed the rules in the middle of the game. Even a child knows that you don't do that, it's not fair.
If Judge Gorsuch had an ounce of integrity, he would have refused to take the seat based on the method in which it was obtained. We now a Supreme Court with an ultraconservative judge who reached the court only through unethical and undemocratic means. I have lost faith in a court that has become so politicized. Any decision in which Judge Gorsuch takes part will be forever tainted.
I don't see how things could possibly return to normal.
First of all, under Republican control, the Senate refused to perform its constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on Judge Garland's nomination. They ignored the fact that this was part of their solemn duty as Senators. They ignored the fact that President Obama had been elected twice and that in both elections he won the popular vote as well as the Electoral College vote. They ignored the fact that he had almost a full year left in his term.
Next, Republican senators tried to intimidate the Democratic senators by threatening to deploy the 'nuclear option' if the Democrats tried to block the nomination. When the Democrats refused to be silenced, the Republicans went ahead and changed the rules in the middle of the game. Even a child knows that you don't do that, it's not fair.
If Judge Gorsuch had an ounce of integrity, he would have refused to take the seat based on the method in which it was obtained. We now a Supreme Court with an ultraconservative judge who reached the court only through unethical and undemocratic means. I have lost faith in a court that has become so politicized. Any decision in which Judge Gorsuch takes part will be forever tainted.
I don't see how things could possibly return to normal.
16
SCOTUS brought this upon themselves by making itself into a political institution. Over the past several decades they took power unto themselves by ruling in areas that should have been left to the States, the Congress or the Executive to decide eventually through the electoral process. That is how a democracy best functions. When nine unelected people take such enormous power unto themselves they become a political body and it is right for the other two branches ro treat them as such.
Regarding Gorsuch, if the tables were reversed can anyone out there honestly opine that Chuck Schummer and his crew would not have done the same to a Republican president? Of course they would have. Just as Harry Reid changed the Senate rules to get Obama's appointments confirmed.
In all of these matters the politicians were just being politicians and reflecting the views of their political bases.
SCOTUS made itself into a political institution and it is now rightfully being treated as one.
Regarding Gorsuch, if the tables were reversed can anyone out there honestly opine that Chuck Schummer and his crew would not have done the same to a Republican president? Of course they would have. Just as Harry Reid changed the Senate rules to get Obama's appointments confirmed.
In all of these matters the politicians were just being politicians and reflecting the views of their political bases.
SCOTUS made itself into a political institution and it is now rightfully being treated as one.
2
"If you cover an institution long enough, you become attentive to its professed values, possibly too much so. In the case of the Supreme Court, those values include discretion, decorum, intellectual polish, collegiality and a disinterested devotion to the rule of law. The raw and angry politics that propelled Judge Gorsuch onto the court were animated by something entirely different."
That may be the myth SCOTUS wants to believe about itself. However, the moment they inserted themselves and decided the 2000 Presidential election, that era was OVER.
That may be the myth SCOTUS wants to believe about itself. However, the moment they inserted themselves and decided the 2000 Presidential election, that era was OVER.
3
Yes if normal means unethical values. Shame on Gorsuch for accepting a position that wasn't rightly his.
14
That such a soulless, hypocritical, political hack like McConnell should have the power to have such a negative effect on the lives of so many Americans is evidence that our democracy has failed to work. In the middle of a major national crisis, he lead his party to prevent the President from succeeding in accomplishing anything to help suffering American. He used the filabuster like a deadly weapon, employing it more times than ever before in the history of the Senate. He used it so much against Obama putting much needed judges on the courts that Harry Reid finally had to get ride of it for lower court justices. Then he denied the President his constitutional right to nominate a judge for the Supreme Court for almost a year. Finally, at the height of hypocrisy, when the opposition party attempted to use the filabuster to stop an extreme political nomination, he destroyed the Senate to end the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations forever. He represents the lowest form of political operative, putting the quest for power over the wellbeing of the country.
11
A psychological portrait of McConnell might indeed prove interesting. In the case of the Garland appointment, I think McConnell, his personal integrity (?) aside, was also the mouthpiece for the long-established and shameful partisan program of defeating every Obama initiative in every way possible. If that's so, it hardly reflects any greater merit on the majority leader's part. The Dems and the GOP have, over the course of a very few years, managed to pretty well wreck the unique value of the Senate in the bicameral system.
3
Your efforts to profile Judges Thomas Hardiman and William Pryor may yet pay off. Either (or both) could soon be nominated.
I have not found an authoritative history of this practice, but it seem justices increasingly time their retirement, when they can. Justice O'Connor clearly planned her retirement in 2005, when she'd be replaced by a R justice, and delayed her retirement when Justice Rehnquist passed. Justices Souter and Stevens retired in mid-2010, when they'd be replaced with D justices. It stands to reason Justice Kennedy might soon consider retiring. I was surprised Justices Breyer and Ginsberg did not retire a few years ago. Of course, Justice GInsberg is on record that she did not "anticipate" the results of the 2016 election. It's hard to know if Justice Breyer was similarly surprised by the election results.
I have not found an authoritative history of this practice, but it seem justices increasingly time their retirement, when they can. Justice O'Connor clearly planned her retirement in 2005, when she'd be replaced by a R justice, and delayed her retirement when Justice Rehnquist passed. Justices Souter and Stevens retired in mid-2010, when they'd be replaced with D justices. It stands to reason Justice Kennedy might soon consider retiring. I was surprised Justices Breyer and Ginsberg did not retire a few years ago. Of course, Justice GInsberg is on record that she did not "anticipate" the results of the 2016 election. It's hard to know if Justice Breyer was similarly surprised by the election results.
Previously the member of SCOTUS who most owed his/her presence there to vicious and calculating cynicism was Clarence Thomas. Now, thanks to McConnell and his fellow serpents, that mantle has passed to Neil Gorsuch.
Congratulations are not necessarily in order.
Congratulations are not necessarily in order.
6
I can't wait to read a biography of McConnell to find out what kind of warped childhood he must've had to grow up into such a vile adult. He has undermined all the values of the United States that I've believed in for 73 years.
40
I am eager to read his posthumous biography.
5
"Things will now return to normal for the court — and for reporters who cover it." Do you really think so? Gorsuch expressed nary an opinion during his confirmation hearings. He didn't even sing the praises of Brown v. Board of Education. Yet we all know that he will come out of the starting gate most likely agreeing with Alito and/or Thomas. This will not have happened overnight, but will be a reflection of his long-held beliefs. He will deservedly be vilified and it will be a long time, if ever, that SCOTUS returns to "normal."
23
Justice Scalia agreed with Alito/Thomas. Gorsuch, replacing Scalia, will return the court to "normalcy". When Ginsberg and/or Breyor retire/pass, that's when you can start complaining.
However, the Conservative justices are the ones that will support your right to cry like a baby. Liberals only support the rights they like.
However, the Conservative justices are the ones that will support your right to cry like a baby. Liberals only support the rights they like.
JMR, Your comments regarding Brown are simply false. During the confirmation, Gorsuch said (regarding Brown), “It is one of the shining moments in constitutional history in the United States Supreme Court” and “It’s a great and important decision” and “It was a seminal decision that got the original understanding of the 14th Amendment right and corrected one of the most deeply erroneous interpretations of law in Supreme Court history, Plessy v. Ferguson, which is a dark, dark stain on our court’s history.” That sure sounds like singing the praises of that decision to me. He may deserve to be vilified in the future, but as of now, you (and others) are falsely vilifying him.
2