Final Word: What Chief Justice Roberts May Have In Mind by His Swing Decision
Since his
decision on the Affordable Care
Act, Chief Justice John
Roberts has now found there is no shortage of GOP and other Conservative causes
that have now turned against his appointment to the Supreme Court.
I may be naïve
but have always harbored a faith in our Democracy in practice is that no matter
the divisive political rhetoric of our elections those flung into high office will abandon any
extreme view and exercise the duty of the office. I first thought this applies
to the Presidency and later include our Congress. Recent developments in the
Supreme Court decision now find that Chief Justice Jon Roberts is not the
monster his detractors claim. Read the Oath Justice Roberts vowed his allegiance.
“In December 1990,
the Judicial Improvements Act of 1990 revised Judicial Oath, found at 28 U. S. C. § 453, reads:
________, do solemnly
swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons,
and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully
and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me
as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So
help me God."
If you read
the key words and phrases of the Oath one can begin to understand, what I hope
gave impetus to Robert’s swing decision. For once in more than a dozen years,
partisan politics is cast aside in favor of what is in the best interest of all
Americans.
Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA): “I don’t want to
drink a beer with him today. I’m not calling for his impeachment, I’m just very
disappointed.”
Rep. Michele
Bachmann (R-MN): “I urge people
to read the dissent …Because that opinion said very clearly, this was an activist
court that you saw today. What they did is not just uphold Obamacare, this Supreme Court re-wrote Obamacare in line
with its own designs.”
Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-SC): “The Supreme
Court’s precedent in this case will far exceed health care. In short, government is now able
to make you do anything by penalizing you with a tax. If future
governments don’t like marriage, it will be able to tax you if you want to get
married.
Pamela
Karlan, Stanford
University law professor said Roberts’s health-care compromise was “certainly
designed to make the court look less political. But in fact it is setting the
seeds for the future.”
Is she forgetting the partisan, pro
corporate decision removing any limits on individual and corporate contribution
to political campaigns?
Forbes
Magazine: “John Roberts: Rarely Has Such A Smart Judge Written Such A Bad
Opinion” By Doug Bandow,
“Roberts’ argument was
disingenuous at best, dishonest at worst. Law professor Richard Epstein called Roberts’ contentions “absurd.”
Bandow concluded the
dissent: “The fragmentation of power produced by the structure of our
government is central to liberty, and when we destroy it, we place liberty at
peril. Today’s decision should have vindicated, should have taught, this
truth; instead, our judgment today has disregarded it.”
Liberals can easily use Bandow’s same argument in supporting the decision.
Michael Savage (broadcaster)
Michael
Savage wondered whether Roberts’ epilepsy medication
affected the chief justice’s cognition.
"Let's
talk about Roberts. I'm going to tell you something that you're not going to
hear anywhere else, that you must pay attention to. It's well known that
Roberts, unfortunately for him, has suffered from epileptic seizures. Therefore,
he has been on medication. Therefore, neurologists will tell you that
medication used for seizure disorders, such as epilepsy, can introduce mental
slowing, forgetfulness and other cognitive problems. And if you look at Roberts' writings you
can see the cognitive dissociation in what he is saying," Michael Savage
said on his radio program this evening.
Glenn Beck “saying the Supreme Court
decision “destroys Bush’s legacy,”
dimmed conservative star Glenn Beck
put his rhetoric where his online store is. He is selling screen-printed
Roberts “coward” t-shirts for
$30 a pop.”
How Glenn Beck believes the Bush legacy is only now been destroyed
is beyond me. George Bush set his legacy as one of the lowest in history.
Bill
O’Reilly
“I’m not
really sorry,” he opened.
“But I am a man of my word. So I apologize
for not factoring in the John Roberts situation. Truthfully, I may be an idiot for not considering
that.”
The existence
of these negative and idiotic statements by conservatives in general and
Republicans only indicates they have misguided intentions in serving in
Congress and more importantly, they serve large corporate interests rather than
the people who elected them.
The TV
pundits and writers lack knowledge of our democracy, our history and lack a
clear vision as to what is contained in our Constitution and Declaration of
Independence. “It’s a no brainer” you have heard the President declare. One can
see to whom he identifies.
These
elected politicians, media and even previous appointments to the Court endanger
not only our Democracy but demonstrate their resolve to further erode and
destroy the middle class and enslave the poor.
My final argument regarding our responsibility in serving this great
nation rests not with just the high federal officials but as one, each citizen
must ponder.
In 1957, John F. Kennedy won the Pulitzer Prize when he wrote, “Profiles
in Courage.” He adroitly utilizes examples in history where “individuals stood
against party politics or in the face of popular opinion and voted or acted
upon their conviction. The literary quote below adeptly depicts what is lacking
is conviction in Washington, D.C.
“In a democracy, every citizen, regardless of his
interest in politics, “holds office”; every one of us is in a position of
responsibility; and, in the
final analysis, the kind of government we get depends upon how we fulfill those responsibilities. We, the people, are the boss, and we will
get the kind of political leadership, be it good or bad, that we demand and
deserve.”
Comments
Post a Comment