For about a year, before giving up in frustration, I had a weekly column in our local newspaper. I've sent in a couple of pieces since then, which they've published. Here's one that appeared today (I admit it's a lot like something I recently posted):
By now I think we can all agree that judicial activism is
defined as a decision with which one disagrees. Has there ever been a more
activist or hypocritical court than today’s? Antonin Scalia has given up even
pretending he’s an “originalist,” whatever that means. John Roberts “calls balls
and strikes” the way Jim Joyce calls people safe at first base. (At least Mr.
Joyce apologized.)
Where does our Constitution tell us that corporations are
people? In which Article or Amendment is it said that money is speech? And how,
might one ask, does the court justify declaring a 35-foot buffer zone around
abortion clinics an unconstitutional impingement on free speech while
maintaining a 90 foot one around their own workplace? (Sorta like Georgia
legislators’ “guns everywhere but the capitol building” law.)
Now we’ve learned that, in their personhood, the religious
beliefs of certain corporations take precedence over the law of the land. (It’s
worth noting that the particular type of organization so exempted represents
over half of all small businesses in the US.) Far be it from me to mention that
the renderers of that bit of wisdom were all male, and mostly Catholic. Not
relevant. But consider this: in expelling this effluvium upon us all, the court
chose to specify which religious beliefs are worthy of legal protection, and
which aren’t. I find that the most amazing and dangerous part of their ruling:
a stunning and egregious flouting of our Constitution. If that’s not an affront
to all religions and the most basic tenets of keeping government out of it, and
a sanctimonious step onto the slipperiest of slopes, I don’t know what is.
People of all religious beliefs, even the ones now anointed with special deference
by those elders of enlightenment, ought to be alarmed. And fearful.
This is not
a wise court. This is a regressive, self-important, ideological and cynical
bunch of judicial activists. Not only that: regarding the science of
contraception they’ve unashamedly embraced the denialistic copout championed by
every leader of their party, as exemplified by John “I’m no scientist” Boehner.
It goes without saying that about half of our citizens would
disagree with every word I’ve written, and most of the commas and periods. I’m
not saying that liberal courts have never tried to wrap the law around their
preconceptions. They have. But I can’t think of a decision -- no, not even Roe
v. Wade -- that so adversely affected so many people; and not just women. People
of all faiths. And people who might have to do business with them.
I grew up in the home of a truly impartial judge, with whose
decisions he himself wasn’t always happy; yet the law demanded it. Oh how we
need such people now on our highest court. Clearly, we all see the world
through lenses of our own, and our decisions and views differ accordingly. That
every tough case in recent years has been decided 5 – 4, with the participants
on each side as predictable as the outcomes, confirms that. “Original intent,”
without digging up the corpses and tapping into their skulls (although they
left many writings that, particularly when it comes to religion, most
conservatives prefer to ignore), is fiction.
Which happens to be the very word Justice Alito used to describe the concept of
corporate personhood on which the Hobby Lobby decision was substantially based.
“Useful fiction,” to be more specific. I’m still pondering that one.
Today’s Republican Party, firmly in the grip of the farthest
of the far right and based as it is on denialism and exclusion and
discrimination and deference to corporatists in all things, rejoices in the
recent rulings of the Supreme Court. But unless they harbor a death wish, they
really ought not. Reality, whether regarding the climate, education, crumbling
infrastructure, or our changing demographics, is not on their side. Wishing it
away, or Foxolimbeckifying it, won’t change things.
Significantly, the chairman
of the Mississippi Federation of College Republicans just resigned and
announced his intention to switch to the Democratic Party. His, he said, had
become too beholden to the Tea Party, moving too far to the right. It’s way
past time for reasonable conservatives – I can name one or two – to stand up
and demand better of their party. Because if we get more judges and legislators
like those calling the shots today, democracy is as doomed as shoreline
property and minority voting rights. Younger people, evidently, are beginning
to understand.
