Friday, May 22, 2009

Supreme Court Stakes

The US Supreme Court has done a lot of good and evil in its time, often ruling one way, such as in favor of segregation, and then righting itself later on. It swings, as we all know, with the Presidency, and the issues around who will become a justice is extremely important to a myriad of groups. I believe that the focus and importance placed on the Supreme Court placements by activist groups has made it a wholly unreliable, untrustworthy, and extremely undemocratic institution.

The Supreme Court Stakes is a betting game, by which you can bet how the Court will rule on an issue. Lately, I can pretty much get it dead on. Gun Control 5-4 Conservative, Diversity in Education (Affirmative Action, Bussing, etc) 5-4 Conservative, the list goes on. Several years ago, conservative groups were whining about how liberals nominated "activist judges" to the Bench. What they meant was "activist in a way I do not like." The so-called law and the interpretation of the constitution are somewhat like different ministers interpreting the Bible, they see what they want to see. For this reason, it is possible to predict rulings on issues based solely on the political affiliations of who is on the Bench, rather having to really understand the law. The Constitution offers no comment on Gay marriage, sanctioned slavery at one time, does not mention anything about abortion, along with many other things. The reality is that the Justices use whatever personal political views they hold to make judgements, more or less finding a way to interpret the Constitution in their favor.

My evidence for every judge being activist is largely based on how much time and money activist groups put into each Supreme Court fight. By mixing these groups in, we ensure that there is no such thing as an apolitical, non-activist judge. I do not know how to fix the Supreme Court and make it a force for the law instead of a force for whatever party put them in power.

No comments:

Post a Comment