II. The current Republican appointed majority have violated their oaths of office. Each federal judge takes an oath: “..that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and the rich..”
The total PATTERN of “winners” and “losers” during the Roberts-McConnell-Leo-Trump “court'” tenure ALONE refutes this; their decisions have in fact changed the Constitution as it was known, 1789 – 2005.
***”Whatever the human law may be, neither an individual nor a nation can ever commit the least act of injustice against the obscurest individual without having to pay the penalty for it.” (Henry David Thoreau)
The Roberts-McConnell-Leo-Trump “court” is rated “most business-friendly” court since at least 1945. Corporations have a 70% plus “win” rate. How can this be “equal justice for the poor and rich”? The word “corporation” isn’t in the Constitution. According to “justice” Alito, this means corporations CANNOT have ANY Constitutional rights. How can a “court,” wanting to “do equal right to the poor and rich” be giving victories to entities that have NO rights???
***”The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint..but is conceived and ordered..in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men in white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices.” [C. S. Lewis]
The R-M-L-T “supreme court” has given “religious conservatives,” prior to 2022, an 85% “win” record; the gave them l00% [three for three]. “Equal justice”??? And – totally out of line with previous Supreme Courts.
The largest and fastest growing American spiritual/religious groups is “the NONES,” with a reported 34% of adults. There are NO “NONES” on this “court.” The NONES and other major religious groups are “losers” in the current “supreme court.” The current “court” has created a class of ‘SUPER Americans” [the religious right whose rights are paramount].
HOW does this constitute “equal justice under the law”?????????
“Religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternative.” [Barry Goldwater, U.S. Senator]
***”A judge can’t have any agenda. A judge can’t have any preferred outcome in any particular case. And a judge certainly doesn’t have a client.” [Samuel Alito, opening statement, his Senate confirmation hearing, 1/9/2006]
WOW !!!!! Think on this – now in nearly 2023. How many Americans would say THIS accurately describes “justice” Alito’s tenure on the 2006-2020 “supreme. court”?????????????
Chief “justice” John Roberts, at HIS Senate confirmation hearing, famously said his role was to “call balls and strikes” – he would merely be an umpire. “Houston, we have a problem”!!!!!!!!!!!! Umpires DON’T change rules, ignore rules, make up new rules during the game, have a strike zone that is somewhere between home plate and first base!!!!!!!!!!!!
“..two projects which Roberts..was making steady progress..one involved race, the other religion. Roberts long-term plan was to change how the Constitution understood both.” [“Justice On The Brink,” Linda Greenhouse] Didn’t she just say Roberts had an “agenda”? Is Mr. Roberts in BIG trouble with Mr.Alito?
“Amy Coney Barrett told senators during her Senate confirmation hearing laws could not be undone simply by personal beliefs, including her own. “It”s not the law of Amy.” [Lisa Mascaro: “Justices’ assurances on’Roe’ now look doubtful”; 12/4/221; Assoc. Press]
“Barrett’s personal religious beliefs matter, but not as much as her pattern of saying that Catholicism should take precedence when it collides with professional responsibilities.” Barrett criticized Justice Brennan’s answer about his Catholicism as, “not a proper response.” [Andrew Seidel, “American Crusade”]. Is Barrett in trouble with Alito also?
“After the hearings, Thomas acknowledged..he had purposely masked aspects of his identity from Congress and the public..during the hearings, Thomas testified..he saw no place for ideology on the high court. “I think..it is important for us..to eliminate agendas, to eliminate ideologies..So I have no agenda.”.. Thomas had proven himself the most political of justices..” Thomas vowed..he intended to spend the next forty-three years..as a Supreme Court justice. It would take that long, he told friends, to get even.” Thomas was also less than honest about his relationship with Anita Hill and about his opinions on abortion. [“Strange Justice,” J.Mayer and J.Abrahamson] Is Thomas in trouble with Alito?
***”Fort a long time I have not said what I believed nor do I ever believe what I say, and if indeed sometimes I do happened to tell the truth, I hide it among so many lies that it is hard to find.” [Machiavelli]
Judicial oaths of office require justices to “support and defend the Constitution..” The Preamble states the Constitution was written to “form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility..promote the general Welfare.”
Both the overall PATTERN and many specific cases DOCUMENT beyond any doubt the R-M-L-T “supreme court” has failed to “uphold the Constitution.” Worse, increasingly now, more and more studies show SUBVERSION of the Framers’ intent and the written Constitution, as understood, 1789-2005.
One of America’s oldest, and most sacred, legal principles is “separation of church and state,” dating from Roger Williams in 1636. 1776-1800 state constitutions were ADAMANT, in very explicit language “neither shall any person, on any pretense whatsoever” be compelled to attend or support a church he did not voluntarily wish to do.
The Roberts “court” has SUBVERTED this in MANY ways
In the unprecedented 2008 “Heller” gun decision, its main author, Scalia, acknowledged the original purpose of the Second Amendment when enacted was to protect state militias capable of resisting federal tyranny. Contrary to five supreme Court decisions, especially “Miller’ [1939], in which a unanimous Court said the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment was to “assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of [state militias]” All this ignores the 1792 “Militia Acts,” which REQUIRED able-bodied free white males, 18-45, to join militias.
Three Roberts “court” decisions have SUBVERTED the “obvious” purpose, substituting an INVENTED “individual right of self defense” and abetting 400 million guns so NOWHERE in America is safe.
Personal privacy was the intent of Amendments III and IV: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects..shall not be violated.” Numerous Supreme Court opinions – prior to 2005 – supported this. The SACRED right “to be let alone” is THE hallmark of democracy.
Because of personal religious beliefs, the 6 Republican “justices” have opposed one of THER most fundamental human rights: reproductive freedom and bodily integrity. Their infamous 2022 “Dobbs” ruling has produced chaos in American health practices. A “more perfect Union, Justice, domestic Tranquility”?????????????????????????
The Roberts-McConnell-Leo-Trump “court” has SABOTAGED Amendment V’s “due process of law” requirement. “The Roberts Court has issued a string of rulings that make it virtually impossible to escape arbitration agreements..The result has been a rapid expansion of private arbitration as a parallel justice system that has supplanted a role once occupied almost entirely by state and federal courts..public courts more permanently disappear as a real option for many Americans..” [“Uncertain Justice”, Tribe and Matz]
Tribe and Matz also: “The Roberts “court” “has dealt critical legal rules a death of a thousand cuts – leaving many of our rights intact but making them effectively impossible to enforce in any court.”
??????????? How does THIS “support and defend the Constitution”???????????????
Well known and respected law professor, Erwin Chemerinsky, has written an entire book, “Closing the Courthouse Doors How Your Constitutional Rights Became Unenforceable.” Case after heartbreaking case DOCUMENT cruelties imposed on ordinary Americans – just like YOU. Read this book. You will be stunned, shocked, angered, incredulous, at how a “court,” “supreme” no less, could do this in the name of YOUR Constitution
***”No people is wholly civilized where a distinction is drawn between stealing an office and stealing a purse.” [Theodore Roosevelt]
A warning was written in 2008 about what law professor Ronald Dworkin feared he was seeing in early Roberts “court” days, “The Supreme Court Phalanx.” Dworkin concluded with: “Perhaps Roberts will keep his word and try in future years to build a new consensus that more faithfully reflects the Court’s traditions. But I suspect that his Senate testimony was actually a coded script for the continuing subversion of the American Constitution. The worst is yet to come.” Would a “reasonable person” say that professor Dworkin was correct: the worst WAS yet to come?
A similar warning by John Dean, “Broken Government. How Republican Rule Destroyed the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches,” can be found in chapter three: “Third Branch: Toward the Breaking Point” on what could happen under right wing fundamentalists. Pages 166-173 provide chilling predictions – some of which have ALREADY come true.
Could Supreme Court justices, upholding “equal justice for poor and rich alike” and the Constitution have an agenda? The current 6 Republican “justices” denied they did in Senate hearings. Do subsequent records and PATTERNS support their claims to no agenda?
Ian Millhiser”s “The Agenda How A Republican Supreme Court Is Reshaping America” suggests they DO have an agenda. If this be true, would our “reasonable person” say all 6 have broken their oaths of office?
Does equal justice for ALL Americans allow a 75% corporate “win” rate, or a 90% “win” rate for religious conservatives? Does their oath of office allow this? Does their creation of a “super class” of Americans allow this?
Does rewriting and/or. sabotaging multiple Amendments allow this?
What do. YOU. think???????????
***”If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.” [Justice Brandeis]
With Justice For All 