Disorder in the Court

Share

Before The Pink Flamingo is criticized for what I am about to say, I want to remind my readers that once upon a time I was an admirer of Antonin Scalia.  That was once upon a time.  I’m coming, more and more, to the conclusion that he needs to be put out to pasture.  Clarence Thomas is almost as bad.

These one time great jurists have become caricatures of everything that is wrong with with today’s conservative movement.  The very real problem is the fact that the movement itself is becoming a caricature of what it once was. Antonin Scalia is literally the poster child for a group of people who have grown almost corrupt from their success.

Michael Tomasky wrote:

“…It has been widely assumed—including by yours truly—that calling Supreme Court justices “politicians in robes,” as I did just last week counts as an insult. But as of Monday—almost surely before, but without any question as of Monday—Nino Scalia wants precisely to be thought of as a politician in a robe. No other reasonable conclusion can be drawn from his churlish and self-aggrandizing and probably unethical tirade against President Obama’s recently announced immigration policy. And while the court majority’s ruling (from which Scalia of course dissented) represents a pretty solid victory for the Justice Department, the narrow win for the state of Arizona on the controversial “where are your papers” part of the law makes it quite possible that these very issues will come to the court again, after Scalia has taken his political position. Just as Zola famously said “J’Accuse!,” I hope the liberal legal groups are already practicing saying “Recuse!”…”

On Monday, Rush Limbaugh went off on a rant and rave, not only supporting Joe Arpaio, who is a known associate of some really nasty right supremacists, KKKers, and even some other vile individuals.  He then began echoing what Justice Scalia said about immigration reform.  The Pink Flamingo would like to pose a question.  Did Rush Limbaugh know, ahead of time, about the decision?

“...On this, as on all other issues, Limbaugh has his loyalists who agree with everything he says. He calls them “dittoheads.” Scalia also has his dittoheads. They are the two justices who joined him in dissent on the Arizona ruling, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. The three are the unwavering conservative block on the court, usually joined by Roberts and occasionally by the perpetual swing voter, Anthony Kennedy.

Those five did band together on a ruling Monday, overthrowing a 100-year-old Montana statute that limited corporate donations to political campaigns. The venerable law was adopted back in the days when copper kings and robber barons bought and sold politicians like hogs at auction. But the law was found to be in conflict with the court’s notorious Citizens United ruling from 2010 that has turned American politics into a shopping mall for big corporations and billionaires.

It is interesting that though Scalia defended the right of states to conduct their own immigration policies to keep their people safe from border crossers, states’ rights did not count for much in his campaign finance deliberation. There, he reasoned that the political interests of billionaires supersede the duty of the state of Montana to protect its citizens from the corrupting influence of monied interests.

Scalia’s comments about President Obama’s shift in immigration enforcement clearly indicate he does not sequester himself in an ivory tower far from the roar of current politics. He knows what is going on. He certainly knows that Citizens United has already had a dramatic effect on the 2012 campaign by sharply tilting the flow of campaign dollars toward the kind of candidates Limbaugh favors.

Apparently that is a result that does not in the least disturb Antonin Scalia and his dittoheads on the high court….”

If this were to have happened with a liberal on the court, there would be no end to ranting and wailing from the fair denizens of the right.

NY Times

In many ways, it’s not about Justice Scalia, but the conservative movement in general.  If a liberal justice were to do and say the same sort of things he and Justice Thomas do, we would never hear the end of it.  It really doesn’t matter what the issue is.  What matters is that conservatives no longer care about standards.  All that matters is winning.  They’ve won, but in losing, they lost their soul.

What good does it do to gain the world and lose your soul?

 

Share

3 thoughts on “Disorder in the Court

  1. In my lifetime I have never seen a Supreme Court as partisan as this one is. You can usually predict with certainty how they are going to vote. Don’t get me started on Clarence Thomas, but those liberals on the court frighten me too. For instance, the Moirae(the three sisters) appear to be rubber stamps for Obama. They are pedants, all of them and sometimes I wonder if there is an independant thinker among any of them. The three branches of government are supposed to balanced, but now all of them are trying to see which one can be the most powerful. I’d better sign off – give me a break!

  2. And now we have Roberts who just gave Obamacare a big thumbs up…and guess who’s fault it is?

    Yep, GW Bush. Actually, it began with Bush 1…according to Glen Beck and other “real” conservatives.

    Funny how no one blames Reagan for Sandra Day O’Conner and Anthony Kennedy huh?

    I just KNEW that they were going to blame Bush for today’s Obamacare ruling as soon as I heard the darling of the conservative’s judges had voted with the Liberals.

    And it didn’t take long.

    Sigh.

Comments are closed.