Dear Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States,
In 7th grade, we learned about checks and balances. Keeping in mind that I am a baby-boomer, the first generation after World War II and living amongst a great number of people with numbers tattooed on their arms, I thought checks and balances were the only way to prevent another attempt at genocide because the Supreme Court would uphold the Constitution to protect all citizens, not just a preferred few. I totally believed with a 7th grader's fervor that our representatives represented
all of us when they sat in those two august chambers. That once someone was sworn in as POTUS, he was responsible for the good and welfare of all Americans because he couldn't possibly get elected if he wasn't an honest and upstanding kinda guy.
But we weren't blind to the issues of governance. We studied the Civil War. We learned about Reconstruction. We were in New York, so we knew what was on the Statue of Liberty and that when they talked about huddled masses yearning to breathe free, they were talking about a lot of our grandparents. It was all very close to home. Our teachers told us what happened in Germany could NOT happen here because we had checks and balances built into our Constitution. And when push came to shove, the Supreme Court, an apolitical, unbiased institution would have the determining say on what could and could not legally be done. The Supreme Court was established to protect We, the People from those who would behave in unscrupulous ways.
The Supreme Court is "distinctly American in concept and function," as Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes observed. Few other courts in the world have the same authority of constitutional interpretation and none have exercised it for as long or with as much influence. In 1835, the French political observer Alexis de Tocqueville noted the unique position of the Supreme Court in the history of nations and of jurisprudence. "The representative system of government has been adopted in several states of Europe," he remarked, "but I am unaware that any nation of the globe has hitherto organized a judicial power in the same manner as the Americans. . . . A more imposing judicial power was never constituted by any people."
The unique position of the Supreme Court stems, in large part, from the deep commitment of the American people to the Rule of Law and to constitutional government. The United States has demonstrated an unprecedented determination to preserve and protect its written Constitution, thereby providing the American "experiment in democracy" with the oldest written Constitution still in force.The complex role of the Supreme Court in this system derives from its authority to invalidate legislation or executive actions which, in the Court’s considered judgment, conflict with the Constitution. This power of "judicial review" has given the Court a crucial responsibility in assuring individual rights, as well as in maintaining a "living Constitution" whose broad provisions are continually applied to complicated new situations.
Why have you abandoned We, the People?
You took away the right of women to determine how our bodies are to be used. You took away the right of parents to choose the life of the mother over the life of the fetus. (
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,)
You refused to rein in Citizens United, thereby putting our elections on the auction block for anyone to spend unlimited amounts to buy votes, thereby overturning precedents dating back 100 years set by the Tillman Act of 1907.
You refuse to take up the issue of ethics when it comes to personal behavior exhibited by members of the court, most noticeably Justice Clarence Thomas whose purchase price appears to be in reach of several of his robber-baron friends. The corollary issue of Mrs. Thomas' attempts to overturn the election has not yielded any sort of censure from that body. A shocking lack of ethics amongst the justices is not news. In fact, policing/monitoring their personal behavior has, for years, been a buried issue. Everyone knows it's an issue and it remains tidily under the rug.
And now, you are working overtime to make sure Feckless Loser is re-elected.
Let me clarify one thing: the states do NOT have the power or the discretion to remove him from the ballot. His name must appear. That's a given. But delaying the hearings on his immunity and instigation of the insurrection absolutely ensures the cases won't be heard/resolved before the conventions, and in turn, a convicted felon may very well be the GOP nominee.
And then what happens? Let's say the trials are delayed until after the election and Feckless Loser becomes Feckless Leader Part Two? If he is a convicted felon, he cannot serve, according to the 14th Amendment, Section 3: Disqualification from Holding Office
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
What happens if you delay the hearings and trials for so long that the election takes place and he wins? Do you think he's gonna stand around with his finger up his butt waiting for the paddy wagon to Club Fed? Or, do you think he's capable of summoning his personal military with an eye to suspension of the Constitution?
Justices of the Supreme Court: guide us; tell us what YOU think is going to happen? Or are you already prepping your retirement on some Caribbean jewel where the agony and disarray that has become America cannot touch you?
To say I am disappointed in The Supreme Court would be a supreme understatement. I get that this is a highly polarized nation. I understand there is a giant disconnect between the Democrats and the Republicans. I grok the concept that there are three branches of government as designed by the drafters of the Constitution. That division and limitation of powers is supposed to protect us, but you are abrogating your responsibility. You patently ignore the will of the people in light of settled law and then you stage a paper coup to make sure that a candidate with a predisposition to act solely on his own behalf can retake the Oval office.
What is wrong with you people?
Recent polls show confidence in the Supreme Court to be at an all-time low. Just for shits and giggles, here are some numbers from the Marquette Law School national survey on the Supreme Court:
And the kicker:
You can see for yourself We, the People, are not thrilled with you. That's because you're supposed to be looking out for all of us, not just your preferred political ideologues. We, the People, understand we might disagree with some of your rulings, but repealing settled law is not in our best interest. The majority of Americans have serious issue with the Dobbs ruling.
Now, all of that aside, allow me to make a recommendation: Clean. Up. Your. Act. Get your ethics house in order first and fast, then start looking out for the rest of us: get those immunity and insurrection hearings up, moving, transparent, and at the very least, transcript available to We, the People. We, the People, deserve to know if this guy is gonna attempt to overthrow the government. And We, the People, need to be prepared.
Do you really want to be known as The Last Court: The OneThat Failed America? I hope not, but folks, you are heading down that road at a pretty scary speed.
Respectfully submitted,
The Wifely Person
The Wifely Person's Tip o'the Week
I want to believe We, the People,
are capable of electing proper government.
Then again, I know better than to believe
the people behind the curtain.
No comments:
Post a Comment