On The Supreme Court

So
the Supreme Court has been igniting passions, has it? Of its Citizens
United decision, people cried: "shameless hypocrisy," "nothing
short of fraud..." "Truly frightening..." "a narrow
elite is imposing itself through the legal system..."

So
the Supreme Court has been igniting passions, has it? Of its Citizens
United decision, people cried: "shameless hypocrisy," "nothing
short of fraud..." "Truly frightening..." "a narrow
elite is imposing itself through the legal system..."

There
are mobilizings to amend the constitution, impeach "the Supreme Court
5," instruct the president on Justice Stevens' replacement.
Senator Schumer, here in the Empire State, is working on a bill that
would force business and nonprofit corporations to reveal their
involvement
in elections!

If
Schumer and others are determined to confront the Supreme Court, maybe
they are unearthing the sources of Citizens United and related
constitutional
infelicities, formulating research questions like: By what flimflam
did the 1787 "Miracle in Philadelphia" convention deny the majority
of humans in this new nation standing before the law? Why did the people

who were people in the early 1800s let Supreme Court justices
seize the authority to amend the Constitution?

But
Schumer isn't very determined. He told the NY Times Company the other
day: "What we're trying to do first is make sure everything we do
is within the constitutional mandate set by the Court."

What's
with such obeisance? Why allow humans in black robes to limit our
aspirations,
supply our words, command our deeds? It's not so hard to ask: So,
what IS the United States Supreme Court? What has been the Court's
role in valiant human struggles to nullify England's and the USA's
defining of whole classes of people -- the majority, actually -- as
unequal, inferior, invisible? How often has it invoked the Anglo-Saxon's

unique reverence for law to instruct the rabble on progress and
civilization?

When
slaves, free Africans, Native peoples, women, indentured servants,
immigrants,
birth control and sexual orientation advocates appealed to the
Constitution
for remedy, how did our honorable justices craft the law of the land?
When farmers, workers and whole communities built a mass movement to
form a cooperative commonwealth instead of a corporate-industrial order,

whose values, sayeth the Court, wielded the Constitution against whom?

When
people opposing US government imperialism and wars vexed white, male,
propertied elites privileged with constitutional head starts, who, ruled

the Court, properly called upon the armed might of the nation?

It's
not a pretty story.

If
the constitutional law professor who is president were somebody else,
he might jump into this teaching moment. His first "Uncolonizing Our
Minds" Chat could go like this:

    "We can avoid careless
    analysis. Here's something I found in an otherwise astute critique
    of Citizens United: 'Congress passed reasonable regulations [on
    corporate
    spending in elections]. And over the decades the Courts have affirmed
    these regulations over and over, to keep the voice of actual citizens
    from being drowned out...'

    "Alas, this does not
    pass the straight face test.

    "Campaign finance laws
    regulating corporations (like laws legalizing corporate lobbying, like
    laws legalizing corporate domination in the workplace and corporate
    poisoning of the Earth), have been cheesy from birth. The 'good
    precedent'
    campaign spending cases Citizens United modified -- such as Austin --
    were no less whimsical than Citizens United...and incoherent to boot.
    Court opinions on corporations and the Constitution -- starting with
    the Dartmouth College case in 1819 -- have consistently affirmed the
    authority of a corporate few to do the real governing in these United
    States. So many of the Court's decisions in 1st and 14th amendments
    cases violated those amendments' clear intent and explicit language.

    "Like, BEFORE Citizens
    United, our corporate class didn't drown out public debate? Didn't
    dictate the framing of issues and legislation? Didn't filter out
    candidates?
    BEFORE Citizens United, financial corporations were not
    transferring
    unimaginable wealth from the many to the few? BEFORE Citizens United,
    people could relatively easily stop US government wars and preparations
    for wars? End this government's manipulations of other peoples, flora,
    fauna, mountains, oceans, seeds, genes and governance?

    "Majorities used to have
    constitutional authority to instruct their representatives to launch
    sane and just transitions in energy, health, agriculture, finance,
    manufacturing,
    media, the workplace? Majorities enjoyed constitutional authority
    to define business corporations as state actors? Render them subordinate

    to municipalities and states?

    "Like, BEFORE Citizens
    United, the United States of America wasn't a minority-ruled
    corporate-imperial
    empire?

    "I'm delighted that
    people have been reading Citizens United. For those shocked at its lack
    of logic, argument by assertion, manipulation of precedent and juridical

    legerdemain, I suggest you read a few score more opinions.

    "I commend to you the
    venerated Chief Justice Marshall -- in my book, he's Mr.
    Argument-By-Assertion.
    Of course, he's in good company: Taney, Bradley, Waite, Brown, Field,
    White, Fuller, Brewer, Story, Swayne, Rehnquist and many more justices
    ably justified injustice. Holmes from his Brahmin perch deftly mocked
    appellants' working class origins and perspectives. Taft saw anarchists
    lurking behind every blade of grass. And check out Chief Justice Warren
    -- you might be surprised at the imperious well-settled law the Warren
    court chose not to trifle with.

    "Read what the Court
    actually wrote in response to constitutional claims by slaves, women,
    workers, free speech and human rights petitioners across two centuries
    and into this 21st. Don't miss the cases adjudicating Native people's
    struggles in every generation, or those addressing people's efforts
    to make peace with our planet

    "I realize that some
    advise caution about opening up dangerous floodgates. But as far as
    I'm concerned, people yearning to be free and self-governing are the
    floodwaters. We've been kept in check by grand myths and relentless
    agitprop about the nation's founding, Anglo-American legal traditions,
    our Constitution, the rule of law. But those gates are made of fairy
    tales. They exist only in our minds. There's no time like our time
    to start tearing them down.

    "Then if we ever DO finally

    turn ourselves into free people, maybe we'll know better than to let
    our sovereign governing authority be snatched from our hands by a few
    people in black robes..."

Join Us: News for people demanding a better world


Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place.

We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference.

Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today!

Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.