Not only is the political slant of the Justices irrelevant, so is the entire Court and the central state it represents.
With the passing of Justice Scalia, the media has embarked on a frenzy of speculation about the political battles that are part and parcel of the President nominating a replacement Supreme Court justice.
While the political chum makes for good copy, the bigger question is rarely (if ever) asked: is the Supreme Court even relevant to the truly significant issues facing the nation?
The conventional view is that the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is always relevant, for the obvious reason that it provides the ultimate interpretation of the law of the land.
But this simplistic view overlooks long periods in the nation's history when the Supreme Court was largely irrelevant to the pressing issues of the era. In some periods, the Court rubberstamped a Status Quo in desperate need of profound political reform.
For example, the current court's ruling in Citizens United vs. FEC allows unlimited election spending by individuals and corporations--effectively distorting (or in an unvarnished word, destroying) democracy as a functioning institution.
In other eras, the key issues were not decidable by court cases or jurisprudence.
No comments:
Post a Comment