* * *
 |
| Supreme Court Building |
The Justices of the Supreme Court have their personal political opinions and that is the key to the way they vote. They can find a reason to justify whatever they choose to do. They can stick to any statute's precise wording or expand upon it, go back to the intent of the framers of a Constitutional provision, pay attention to or choose to ignore 'stare decisis' (previous decisions), or even base their decisions on their foreseeable future consequences, not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution or in any statute. There is no rule book by which they always play. They do what they want to do, what their politics dictate, and find a way to justify their action. That's why Donald Trump might enjoy a pleasant retirement playing golf and hosting events at Mar-a-Lago, unless President Biden is re-elected along with a Senate majority, enabling him to add four Justices, changing the politics of the SCOTUS.
Right now, if re-elected along with a Democratic Senate, I support Biden doing precisely that, because today, the present political orientation of the SCOTUS has been extremely damaging to the country. A new majority must be created to undo the harm done by the three political appointments of Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. The SCOTUS was never intended to be a political football until the Republicans made it into one under the leadership of Mitch McConnell, in obedience to Donald Trump’s wishes. That’s the game they played, so the Democrats must play it too, at least at this time.
But such Court expansion should not be a permanent solution, something to be frequently turned to when the presidency and Senate make it possible. That would not be good for the country either.
The politics of the SCOTUS Justices reflect the mood of the country, and because Justices are given a lifetime position, what they reflect is rarely the current mood. No SCOTUS Justice is apolitical. They reflect what the nation's mood was at the time of their lifetime appointments. I believe that while SCOTUS’ politics should take that past mood into consideration, there should be significant limitations regarding the weight it should be given. The problem is how to accomplish that. Doing so via Constitutional amendments would take far too long, so periodic Judiciary Acts, passed by Congress would seem to be the best course of action.
I suggest that once President Biden is able to expand the SCOTUS to undo the terrible harm the present majority has caused, especially in the areas of womens’ rights, gun violence, voting rights, environmental protection and business regulation, its number of Justices should be fixed to a permanent number, with no further expansion. I also think we need to limit the terms of SCOTUS Justices to about a dozen years, so that appointees come closer to reflecting the nation’s political mood and not what it was generations ago. Further, I would limit the nominating abilities of a president in his second and final term in office to less than that, perhaps with Justices then appointed to serve for half that period, so that he or she cannot ‘load the Court’ during their last days in office with Justices who would be around for a dozen years.
The past then would be honored and respected but not dominate the Court’s decisions, as it does today where it is far out of step with the political mood of the country, made possible by Justices appointed decades ago, reflecting the nation’s mood at that time.
JL
* * *
Trumpublican Dead-Ends
Professor Heather Cox Richardson’s Substack posting on ‘Letters From an American,’ dated April 13 thoroughly describes the dead-ends into which their bankrupt policies have led both Donald John Trump and the Republican Party.
Yet there are, as I have often pointed
out, a significant number of voters who because of their bigotry,
selfishness, greed, ignorance, gullibility, or just plain stupidity (or varying
combinations of these qualities) seem comfortable in that
‘dead-end’ cul de sac where autocracy and dictatorship fester. You cannot ignore their presence. They are there, just as they were in other
‘democracies’ where noble endeavors were thwarted by those of evil intent whom
democracy allowed to take charge. Examples?
The French Revolution, the Weimar Republic, and the Russian Revolution.
We must be eternally vigilant.
You can find Professor Richardson’s daily (they are written the prior evening) postings at https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/ where I recommend you check them out each morning. They are free unless you want to comment. Give it a try by CLICKING HERE.
JL
* * *
Another Letter of Mine Published
The Palm Beach Post, which has an infinitely wider circulation than Jackspotpourri, published another letter from me, with just a few very minor changes, this one on April 17. The editorial to which it refers described the many shortcomings of Florida’s Governor and Legislature. The letter was brief but to the point, making it very simple:
“Sunday’s Post editorial,
‘We’re heading in the wrong direction; fix it, DeSantis,’ was aimed at
the wrong person. The Post knows that he
will not ‘fix it.’ The editorial should
have been directed toward those who have the ability to ‘fix it,’ the voters of
the state of Florida. All they have to
do is to avoid voting for Republicans, especially those running for seats in the
Florida Legislature.”
I encourage followers of this blog to write letters to whatever newspapers, magazines, or social medial sources they follow. You have a voice. Use it.
JL
* * *
Israel vs Iran - an Open Secret
The strangest thing about the Iranian drone and rocket attack on Israel was that it was neither a secret nor a surprise. Iran had said that it would do something when Israel bombed a meeting of its generals in Damascus involved in organizing Hamas and Hezbollah attacks on Israel, killing a few of them. And Iran let Turkey know what it was about to do as revenge for that, who passed the word on to the United States, which told the Turks to tell Iran to keep their operation ‘within certain limits.’ Which they did.
It is safe to conclude that Israel was made fully aware by Washington of what Iran was about to do, enabling them (with British, French, and Jordanian assistance) to disable 99% of the Iranian drones, missiles, and rockets. Iran was able to say they had retaliated for the Damascus bombing and Israel was able to say they had successfully survived that Iranian retaliation, satisfying both governments’ need to declare their successes. Both sides were playing to their political audiences. But more than that was at stake. Muslim nations are quick to see that Iran is a far greater threat to them than is Israel. That recognition is what this was a part of.
Meanwhile, Israel was still
trying to recover the hostages held by Hamas, simultaneously working to destroy that
group’s military presence in Gaza, losing support of many in Israel and
elsewhere along the way, and dealing with significant domestic disagreements,
primarily centered on the right-wing support essential to Bibi Netanyahu’s
survival in office. Diversion of their energies and resources to Iran and its
Hezbollah followers can wait for the time being. But it will come at a time of Israel’s
choosing.
JL
* * *
Shakespeare In the Criminal’s Mind – Listen to the Lawyers
There are two generally accepted interpretations of Shakespeare’s lines from Act IV, Scene II of his play, Henry VI, Part II. The words ‘The first thing we do is, let’s kill all the lawyers,’ are spoken by Dick the Butcher, and from one viewpoint, paints lawyers as part of, and supporters of, a corrupt legal system that prevents the people from receiving justice, and as a profession that favors the powerful and wealthy, justifying in his eyes their being ‘killed.’ This viewpoint omits the fact that Dick was an admitted criminal, if not a terrorist.
On the other hand, however, another interpretation recognizes that omission and suggests that Shakespeare is saying that lawyers should be praised because they stand in the way of such criminals as Dick the Butcher who understandably, from a law-breaker’s standpoint, would want society to be rid of lawyers who supposedly work within the existing framework of laws. This paints lawyers as a great benefit to society.
I am pretty sure that both the lawyers defending Donald John Trump and those prosecuting him in his New York ‘hush money’ trial all agree with the second interpretation, believing they are doing the right thing in the pursuit of justice. But in listening to their arguments, particularly those of the former president’s defense attorneys, the non-lawyer public might be more sympathetic to Dick the Butcher’s position, even though he is a scoundrel and criminal.
I suppose the audience in those days saw both sides of the coin, depending on where they stood politically, because then, as is the case today, current political issues lurked in the background, with the well-meaning but dangerous dictatorship of Oliver Cromwell taking power a few decades after the play was written.
Follow the lawyers, on both sides, carefully, and decide if their actions warrant anything near the level of punishment Dick suggests. In Seventeenth century England, they weren’t ‘killed,’ but certainly some were thought of as an obstruction by a less than democratic government.
JL
* * *
Playing in the outfield for the San Francisco Giants is Mike Yastremski. I had assumed he was the son of acclaimed Boston Red Sox ballplayer, Carl Yastremski, but I was wrong. He is his grandson. Oy!
JL
* * *
Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri
Strange “Hits’! The large number of those accessing Jackspotpouri from Singapore has suddenly ceased. In their place, however, there have appeared large numbers of ‘hits’ on each posting in the hundreds, and as was the case with those from Singapore, but this time from Hong Kong! I suspect that the Chinese are playing around with internet transmissions, possibly to try to identify who is reading them.
Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com.
Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it. Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.
If you want to send someone the
blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or
you can provide a link to that address in your email to them.
There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog.
Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com, or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting.
Again, I urge you to forward
this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it, particularly if
they are a registered voter. This is
an election year. Spread the word.
JL
* * *
No comments:
Post a Comment