Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Editorial: Legal attrition
The conservative majority on the Supreme Court forgoes consensus building to redefine fundamental liberties.
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
When Chief Justice John Roberts was trying to convince the Senate he was the right man to head up the nation's top court, he pledged he would build consensus.
"I do think the chief justice has a particular obligation to try to achieve consensus consistent with everyone's individual oath to uphold the Constitution," he told the Senate Judiciary Committee, "and that would certainly be a priority for me if I were confirmed."
Promises, promises.
The Supreme Court kicked off the final week of its term with four 5-4 decisions. Such close decisions have been commonplace since President Bush appointed Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the court. The two new justices have failed miserably to build consensus. Instead, they have swung the court far to the right, mangling precedent and the Constitution in the process.
Monday's quartet of bad decisions -- with more possibly on the way this week -- showed just how convoluted conservative reasoning can be to reach politically palatable pronouncements from the bench.
Free speech? Sure, for corporations looking to buy influence over elections at the 11th hour, never mind that the court had to overturn a four-year-old precedent to get there. Not for a student waving a nonsensical sign that could, maybe, possibly be read to advocate drug use, though.
Separation of church and state? Not if it's the president advocating religion. The decades-old precedent that allows Americans to challenge payments to religious organizations applies only against the legislative branch, not the executive branch, silly atheists.
Protecting the environment? The federal government may abdicate its responsibility to states that can then let developers do whatever they want.
The same majority made each of the decisions happen. Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy joined Roberts and Alito to protect conservative purity.
So much for consensus: 5-4 splits have been disturbingly common this term.
These particular decisions probably will not fire up average citizens, but Americans ignore them at their own peril. None was dramatic, but each is part of a gradual reshaping of the legal landscape.
Republican presidents appointed seven of the court's nine justices, and some of the most conservative of them will likely linger for decades. Their impact will be cumulative. More 5-4 decisions will slowly make a difference in people's lives until, one day, Americans awaken and wonder what happened to their nation.
