IN READING THE SEVERAL posts RMJ posted about just this weekends' manifestations of Trump's floridly senile and demented statements about him achieving percentages in the thousands of reductions in the price of drugs - an achievement which not only never happened but would mean that the drug companies would have to be paying patients back handsomely for buying their drugs - it makes me ask a question I have not heard asked at all.
ARE JOHN ROBERTS AND THE OTHER SUPREME COURT 'justices' WHO HAVE MADE THE UNITARY EXECUTIVE, FASCIST INTERPRETATION OF THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY "LAW" PROUD OF WHAT THEY HAVE, BY A VOTE OF SIX SINGLE PEOPLE TO THREE BROUGHT THE UNITED STATES TO?
This, this very real, very actual, entirely non-Ivy League Law faculty theoretical TRUMP is the embodiment of what they think is desirable for the United States of America to be governed by. THIS follows on to the Bush II, not even smart, though criminal, daddy Bush, "H.W." BUT the idiot son "W" Bush who was a cautionary example of what the unitary executive theory could bring in the very lifetimes of those six "justices" ALL OF THEM PRODUCTS OF ELITE LAW SCHOOL EDUCATIONS, ALL OF THEM MEMBERS OF THE LAWERLY (liarly) ELITES, his diasterous presidency - I WILL REMIND YOU BROUGHT TO US BY REHNQUIST COURT FIAT - to have cautioned them as to the very real life consequences of their elite-entirely anti-democratic, entirely financially self-interested legal, constitutional theory for those in real life who don't get to live "safe in their alabaster chambers, untouched by morning and untouched by noon."
Though I doubt ol' Emily Dickinson realized she was describing late 20th century, early 21st century Ivy League law faculty and their spawn who would be put into that ultimate alabaster chamber, the goddamned supreme Court. Though, considering her lawyer politician-father's relationship with those who took a dim view of how Harvard (see the intentions of those who founded Amherst College) was developing, even then, maybe she did have some such idea.
Only Roberts' clique has no intention of their Doge surrendering, they really believe he is going to do everything from making their familiy's extraction industry fortune safe from environmental action (Coney-Barrett, among others)* to keeping "People Unlike Us" (People of Color, etc.) out of their alma maters and professions and clubs and out of the voting booth and out of Congress (all of them clearly have that goal. John Roberts can stand as the Taney of this racist court, and I include that poison well of pathology, Thomas in that). They are well on their way to reinstituting de facto Jim Crow with all of its necessary violence of enforcement.
They really have been prepared to not only intentionally pave the way for the stupidest, most criminal, most vulgar, most corrupt man to have ever held the presidency (even more so than the one who appointed Alito and Roberts) to rule as an absolute dictator, they are doing their best to try to enable his idiocracy, his gangster governance even as they try, in the most modest of ways, to cover their own judicial asses as they do it.
John Roberts et al are the most corrupt of the already very corrupt Courts since the one chiefed by John Marshall - a man who never found a slave to side for in the many cases that massive slave holder ruled in and who grabbed the unconstitutional Marbury power for the court. John Roberts has gone farther than Taney or those who started destroying and distorting the 14th and other Civil War Amendments to work for the newly empowered successor of the slave-power allegedly defeated in the Civil War and against which those Amendments were adopted. He is the most corrupt, most criminally intending Chief Justice in the history of the country and his fellow five are as worthy of removal and prosecution for their crimes against equality and democracy and even the inadequate and fatally flawed liberal democracy that was set up by the Constitution and the early revolutions of Jefferson and Jackson. I have a theory of the history of my country that literally everything good about us has been in opposition to the Constitutional order as originally set up and as it has been distorted by the Supreme Court and the corrupt powers in the other branches. The abolition movement, the Women's rights movement, the struggle for equality, the struggle against wage-slavery and oligarchy, etc. have all been struggles against the Constitution and the law as it was set up and as it developed in each and every case. The Supreme Court, presented in amber-tinted, soft-focused sentimentality in the American media and academia is and always has been the primary engine of anti-equality, anti-democracy, pro-oligarcy in our country and our history. It has been the forces of "Constitutionalism" which constitute the worst of our history. Though they won't tell you that in your education as a "Constitutional scholar."
Either the United States will adopt a different Constitution, one which will, among other things, strip the usurped Marbury power and the even more appalling add-ons made by academic law school fascists** or the United States will possibly devolve into one of three things. The oligarchic fascism they clearly favor (no doubt with "the vote" of white racists propagandized by our "free speech absolutist" lying media), an even worse fascism which those soft-handed, soft-brained "justices" believe couldn't happen here, or the United States will split into two or more entities, I think there are regions and states which will eventually conclude that they can't tolerate the Constitutional order as it has become in reality. If there will be a civil war, this time waged by the slave-power states (which now include many even in the upper-mid-west and Rocky Mountain states) against those who favor equality and democracy, God only knows.
I used to fantasize about the possibility of Canada taking Maine, my state, in though I would caution Canada against doing that without the strongest of grantees that U.S. habits of thinking wouldn't prevail in any part of the old US that wanted in on a more modern Constitution in a country which still aspires to egalitarian democracy. The greatest disincentive of that on the part of Mainers, that it would probably forfeit the Social Security of those in the state who paid into it, the Republican-fascists seem to be about to remove as they destroy Social Security - another thing the Roberts six are perfectly OK with. If Mainers didn't have that keeping them from it, I think only the really hard cases would oppose that. But, of course, all that is only a fantasy. I can tell the difference, Roberts, Coney-Barrett et al seem to have been educated out of being able to discern that kind of thing. The Ivys and their equivalent can do that to you.
* Though I have absolutely no doubt that the racism, sexism, dislike of freedom of choice in abortion and contraception, class hatred of the six fascist "justices" are a strong motivation YOU CAN BE CERTAIN THAT THEIR PRIMARY MOTIVATION IS THE PROTECTION OF THEIR PERSONAL AND FAMILY MONEY AND THAT OF THEIR UPPER CLASS. That, alone, explains pretty much about 19 twentieths of the history of the Supreme Court in action.
Though, thinking this out and writing it makes me realize that we need a word to describe Clarence Thomas's clear and serially demonstrated hatred of Black People, "racist" doesn't cover it. I don't think there has been a "justice" since the 19th century who has more clearly demonstrated his hatred of Black People than that ocean of pathology.
** Those currently at Harvard, alone, are a ship of lunatics who are often fools of the worst kind, and that's ONLY HARVARD! Many of them are the most lunatic are "trad-catholic" theocrats of the most insane variety. I was working on a post about that, too, but the iffy internet here is delaying that post.
No comments:
Post a Comment