When President George H.W. Bush nominated David Souter for the Supreme Court, he apparently knew little about the man. Souter sided with liberals on the Court, and was extremely harsh in his criticism of conservatives, especially the Chief Justice, John Roberts. His primary complaint was that Roberts had organized a large effort to ensure that the controversial “Citizens United” was upheld.
Souter was very critical of Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito. He believed that they conspired to support the Republican agenda. When created by our founding fathers, the Court was intended to be non-partisan.
When Justice Souter wrote the dissent about Citizens United, it was so damning that Roberts made special efforts to prevent its publication. Unfortunately, there is no way to access the document. When Souter announced his resignation in 2009, he donated all of his papers to the New Hampshire Historical Society, and will be unavailable for 50 years.
The discussion between Constitutional scholars is whether the Constitution must be followed literally, or if it is a ‘living document.’ Although Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, and Alito claimed that they believed it must be applied as written in 1789, they changed the meaning of “freedom of speach” in the first amendment when they declared that corporations were people.
Although Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, Souter retired after serving on the bench for less than 19 years.
One of the important results of this election is the fact that our 45th president will appoint one new justice, and possibly as many as four.
President Obama attempted to nominate Merrick Garland earlier this year, but, as he has done for eight years, Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, refused to do his job and hold hearings. Garland, who is presently the Chief Justice of the Appellate Court, is considered a moderate and respected judge by both political parties. However, the worst Senate Majority Leader in our nation’s history kept the promise he made in 2009, and continued to do nothing.
This act of betrayal and laziness may backfire. Hillary Clinton is likely to nominate Garland, or others like him, but she may choose more liberal men or women for the Court. Only time will tell.
Of course if Donald Trump should “rig” the election with further attempts in consort with Vladimir Putin, and soil the White House, we have no insight into who he might nominate. Although someone gave him a list, I am certain that he knows nothing about any of them.
Personally, I believe we need more men or women similar to Justice Souter. He fought for the majority of our nation’s people, and was a true patriot who denounced special interests, and supported the meaning of the Constitution.
If you agree, please re-post. I thank you.
Op-Ed
By James Turnage
Photo Courtesy of Harvard Law Record
Follow me on twitter; @jamesturnagenov
The Truth With No Restrictions 