So many of the important decisions of the United States Supreme Court are decided by a single vote.
Often that vote is Anthony Kennedy. Not a bad single vote to have, considering the alternatives.
What if Kennedy’s single vote didn’t matter anymore because Kennedy or one of the four solidly conservative members of the Court retired, became ill, or died, and was replaced by an Obama nominee?
Food for thought: Justices Scalia and Kennedy each were born in 1936.
Obama would have the opportunity to shape the Court for a generation, not just to replace liberal Justices with other liberal Justices.
CBS News’ Jeff Greenfield refers to this as The (Possible) Mother of All Battles
Who do you want Chairing the Senate Judiciary Committee in such event, Pat Leahy (D-VT) or Jeff Sessions (R-AL)?
Assuming Democrats retain control of the Senate, and Leahy is Chair, do you want Democrats to have to flip just 2-3 Republican Senators, or 6-7, in order to break a filibuster?
It is going to take years to undo the Obama economic disaster, but it can be accomplished through Congressional elections every two years, and particularly the 2012 presidential election.
But if Obama gets his way in tilting the Court, there would be nothing anyone could do about it for multiple decades.
Given reasonable life expectancies, we will be talking about Justice Sotomayor 20 years from now, and Justice Kagan 30 years from now. Two more in the same mold plus Justice Breyer, and the next presidential election may not matter as to the balance of the Court.
So prepare for The (Possible) Mother of All Battles now.
If this doesn’t motivate you, then nothing will.
——————————————–
Related Posts:
I Am Not The Only One Praying For This
Will Anyone Ask Kagan What The Meaning of “Is” Is?
Sotomayor Threw O’Connor Under The Bus
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
"But if Obama gets his way in tilting the Court, there would be nothing anyone could do about it for multiple decades."
Question – how is a Supreme Court justice held accountable? I know it has never happened, but doesn't the US Constitution say that a justice may be removed by impeachment?
Unlikely that it will ever be done, I know. But, how are justices held accountable? What is the boundary of a justice on the Supreme Court? There must be some way that we can be protected from judicial tyranny. Is there a boundary?!
Mother of all battles? With these 'fold and cower' Republicans? I wouldn't even hold hope for a filibuster against a WEAK Liberal candidate from this bunch.
You make an excellent point.
I agree with uncledan. A Senate that has Lindsey Graham, Richard Lugar, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain, and Scott Brown will always have a reserve of useful idiots that Democrats can tap when they need to.
Consider the fact that most of the above distinguished Republicans voted for the hardcore racist Sotomayor. Scott Brown seems to be fashioning a career as Harry Reid's 60th vote on other issues, and I have no hope that Centerfold Boy will suddenly remember why voters sent him there in the first place. Snowe and Collins gave us Obama $1T pork bill. McAmnesty and Gramnesty have pushed for amnesty for illegals and global warming cultism – two massive unforced errors that help Democrats only.
The only question that any Democrat court nominee faces is: will they get "only" 60 votes, or could they get a lot more?
OK, I'm motivated. So what?
Last time around, I was motivated to elect a Republican senator from Wisconsin only to have the national Republicans starve the state for campaign funding to support the strategic goal of electing the critically important Arlen Specter. How did that work out for ya?
Peter Fitzgerald was a first term Republican senator from Illinois. Senator Fitzgerald was a public minded go getter who was a force opposing corruption in Illinois. He was behind getting Patrick Fitzgerald to investigate Governor Ryan who was subsequently convicted and imprisoned. The Illinois Republican Party decided to shove him aside rather than support him for re election. Seems like it had something to do with protecting their phony baloney jobs.
The Republicans ran Alan Keyes who lost the senate race to Barack Obama which means that the Illinois Republican Party was responsible for putting Obama on the path to the White House.
The Republicans really are the stupid party.
"Obama ecomomic disaster" – what planet are you living on
DINORightMarie,
The judiciary power is checked in that the SCOTUS candidates must be nominated by the Executive and approved by the Legislature. (I know — sure is working great!).
See Article III, Section I: judges serve "during good behavior." And these vipers who are bent on dismantling the Constitution lead banal lives and cover their destruction with the language of wood.
I agree, we should be alarmed that the decisions of the SCOTUS break along political lines rather than being the products of conscientious legal scholarship. From the outside looking in, sussing out all those emanations of penumbras seems about as valid as divining the truth by stirring chicken guts. But I've a quibble with this:
"Given reasonable life expectancies, we will be talking about Justice Sotomayor 20 years from now, and Justice Kagan 30 years from now."
This is true "given reasonable life expectancies" but these two lovelies look like short-fused cholesterol bombs. You're right to be concerned that a single illness on the right side of the Court could be a disaster for conservatism. It's obvious that the conservative majority hangs on by a slim thread.
However, the reverse is also true — a single cardial infarction would be an equal, or even greater disaster for the left. Given that a Supreme Court justice can serve for life, installing visibly unhealthy justices would not seem to be the best strategery for creating a long legacy….
Thanks for scaring the pants off me.
One word. Nullification.
With all due respect, it is no longer possible to retract federal government power within the system without shock.
The very three pronged system of government along with the constitution so carefully designed to obstruct concentration of power now acts to systemically impeded its dissolution.
The 17th amendment and activist judges have both conspired in their own ways to deny citizens the public forum they deserve in debating the government they want through the constitution.
Since the Fed can now prints money with impunity, there is no natural constraint on government power.
An external shock is the only way to control government failure. Therefore concerned citizens should concentrate their efforts on state government elections, not federal. It is there where the machinery can hope to dissolve the leviathan.