Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumThom Hartmann: 9 Unelected Kings & Queens is our Biggest Challenge
Here's my take on Thursday's Supreme Court ruling...it never should have happened.
Everything about Thursday, from Fox and CNN screwing up the ruling early on to the hours of punditry that followed to the competing speeches from Mitt Romney and President Obama, none of it should have happened.
None of it should have happened because our democracy settled this issue more than two years ago when after a year of debate our elected Members of Congress passed Obamacare with a majority in both the House and the Senate, and that law was signed by our elected President of the United States.That's how our democracy works. We elect people to write and pass laws, and then we keep electing them or we elect someone else to do the same job. But what happened Thursday was not an exercise in democracy - it was an exercise in monarchy.
Despite our democracy settling this issue, here we all were two years later waiting to hear from the modern day Oracles at Delphi. Our news media, our elected politicians, and the tens of millions of Americans who finally had some reprieve thanks to Obamacare, were forced to wait at the steps of the Supreme Court building where nine unelected justices would, like kings and queens, give their ultimate say about the trivial concerns of the People.
What happened today reveals a deep flaw in our system of government - a flaw that was created more than 200 years ago.
In the early years of our nation the Supreme Court was a very, very boring place. It was, as the Constitution says, simply the final arbiter in legal disputes, which at the time tended to be things like a legal battle between two farmers who were arguing over whose dog ate whose chickens. The idea of the unelected Supreme Court having the power to strike down an entire law passed by an elected Congress and signed by an elected President was unthinkable. The idea that our early Senators and Representatives would have to wait outside the doors of the Supreme Court, like Michele Bachmann and Orrin Hatch did today, waiting for the Justices' ruling on laws they passed out of Congress, was unheard of. After all, nowhere in the Constitution does it say the court has the power to do this. In fact, Article 3, Section 2 says just the opposite. It says the court has to operate under regulations established by Congress.
But in 1803, in the case of Marbury v. Madison, everything changed. That was when the high court assumed the power to strike down laws, and they called it judicial review.Thomas Jefferson was the President at the time and he knew the consequences of this power grab by the Supreme Court. He knew that it effectively turned our democracy into a monarchy that it stripped power from "we the people" and handed it off to nine kings in black robes.
As Jefferson wrote to John Adams wife in 1804, "The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional, and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the legislature and executive also, in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch."
And as Jefferson wrote to Virginia Supreme Court Justice and Patrick Henry's father-in-law, Spencer Roane, in 1819, "If the judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the government...then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de so (suicide pact)...The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary..." Jefferson knew the job of interpreting the Constitution should be left up to "we the people" by electing representatives every two years who write and pass laws based on their interpretation of the Constitution. If "we the people" don't like how our elected representatives are interpreting the Constitution, then guess what happens? We vote them out of office.
As Jefferson wrote in 1823, still bitter about the Supreme Court's decision twenty years earlier, "This case of Marbury and Madison is continually cited by bench and bar, as if it were settled law...the Chief Justice says, 'there must be an ultimate arbiter somewhere.' True, there must; but The ultimate arbiter is the people." Today's display on the steps of the Supreme Court was not the America envisioned by our Founders, and particularly not the America envisioned by the author of our Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson. In writing that declaration, Jefferson struck the first major blow against monarchy only to see it creep back into America in the form of the Supreme Court during his own first term as President. And it's still with us today.
Yes, the court probably did the right thing in upholding Obamacare. But as long as they have the power of judicial review the power to strike down laws passed by "we the people" - then it's just a matter of time before they abuse this power just like they abused it in 2010 when the Roberts court wiped out a century of campaign finance law in Citizens United. Healthcare for all is vital for our nation, but restoring power in the hands of "we the people" and not keeping it concentrated in the hands of nine unelected kings and queens is our biggest challenge.
The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann on RT TV & FSTV "live" 9pm and 11pm check www.thomhartmann.com/tv for local listings
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 2860 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (11)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Thom Hartmann: 9 Unelected Kings & Queens is our Biggest Challenge (Original Post)
thomhartmann
Jun 2012
OP
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)1. I agree with Thom. nm
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)3. I agree with Thom and Thomas nt
Overseas
(12,121 posts)2. This was a great Daily Take! K&R! The unelected Supreme Court has gotten too much power.
I agree and didn't realize how strongly Thomas Jefferson had objected to that danger way back in his day.
Sirveri
(4,517 posts)4. Sorry, but Judicial review is a good thing.
Lets say Congress passes a law saying that the police can search your house whenever they want without a warrant.
Clearly unconstitutional. Great, but you can't do Judicial review to strike it down, so... you're screwed. It's a basic check and balance. The issue isn't Judicial review, it's corrupted partisan judges. Expand the court by 1 or 2 seats, it's time to do it since we've grown substantially since the last time we expanded the court.