An early thought on the US Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling today upholding the Affordable Health Care Act, with Chief Justice John Roberts, a George W. Bush appointee, providing the key fifth vote:
Roberts saved the Court from a damaging partisan, ideological stain had the decision been 5-4 the opposite way, with Roberts joining the other conservatives and serving up, in an election year, another routine, rightist, pro-Republican reflex.
What Roberts did was more than affirm Pres. Obama's signature piece of legislation. Roberts proved the Court can break out of a rigid ultra-conservative template that produced Citizens United, for example, or that lined up 5-4 to validate Bush's win over Al Gore.
So now we have a less predictable, more open-minded US Supreme Court.
This is what we do not have in Madison, where the Wisconsin Supreme Court has lapsed into partisan and ideological predictability.
Everyone knew that there would be a 4-3 vote to allow Walker's anti-union Act 10 to become law - - where David Prosser delivered the majority, GOP-serving decision and thus reinforced the court's current ideological reputation.
An appearance that seems headed for more validation as the court is headed towards a procedural move - - multiple recusals - - that could allow Prosser to avoid a hearing on pending ethics complaints arising from an alleged altercation with Justice Bradley as the Act 10 ruling was being considered.
Chief Justice Rpberts in Washington has stepped forward as the Chief Conciliator: in Madison, whom among Prosser, Roggensack, Ziegler and Gableman - - a group that owes its allegiance to the WMC - - is willing to play that role?
0.0
ReplyDelete"The Roberts Court is Not the Prosser Court" . . . but the Prosser Court may be the Scalia Court, with all its finger-shaking, eyeball-popping, temple vein-throbbing, anger management-needing members. What a relief it will be when these two relics are gone. Can it happen soon enough?
ReplyDeleteRoberts didn't rule on this to be conciliatory, he ruled on this because that is how he saw the law. He calls them as he sees them, not to be friends with anyone and I respect that.
ReplyDeleteDid I agree with his decision? Of course not. Do I think it is right? No. I guess it is a tax after all Mr. President. Thanks for giving us the biggest tax increase in our nation's history.
However, we'll just have to buckle down and make sure we can get enough votes in the senate and elect Romney to get it overturned.
What I won't do is sit here and cry that every time a decision doesn't go my way it is extremism or partisanship.
My best guess is the next time they rule with a 5-4 majority for the conservatives, people will be back to calling Roberts a partisan and saying how divided the SCOTUS is.
What I found interesting is that Kennedy, the supposed "Wild Card" actually dissented and called for the whole act to be thrown out.
Oh well... On to November.
Romney/Ryan 2012
But President Obama has told us that his key piece of legislation,"Is not a tax."
ReplyDeleteI guess he was wrong.
I wonder how the debt generation will view another new federal tax given the trillions they already owe.
Less hope, less change.
I wonder why people think it is so bad to pay for health care, but they do accept Medicare for themselves.
ReplyDeleteOur Wisconsin Supreme Court is much more screwed up than the US Supreme Court, but that isn't a big compliment to the US Supreme Court either. They are just slightly less activist in a reactionary way.
Hope and Change continues. GO O!
ReplyDelete4 more years!