Who Should The Next Supreme Court Justice Be?

Intellectuals seem to view each national horse race as important for many reasons but the one most often cited would have to be the possibility that a new president will be in a position to nominate justices to the Supreme Court.

People suffering from “two-party-itis” regularly tell deluded, independent, naifs like myself, that we simply must choose between Democrat and Republican because our single vote may well decide Roe v. Wade all over again!

Electoral college and safe states arguments aside, this discussion would almost be funny. If people could just lift themselves out of their illogical reveries and hover for a moment of quiet reflection, they might see what I see. I always relish the expression on an insistent Democrat’s face when I ask if they know how many Senators opposed Antonin Scalia’s appointment to the court? Scalia was, and is, seen widely as one of the most conservative justices we have had. Many thought that his appointment to the bench could signal the end of abortion rights as we know them.

The answer, in case you’re not aware of it, is none. Not a single Senator stepped forward to oppose Scalia’s confirmation. Not one single Democrat came out swinging or said, “Hey! That’s not a good idea!” Scalia was confirmed 98-0 by the U.S. Senate. Apparently, the same Democratic Party that insists we choose our presidents based on potential court picks were (unanimously) willing to risk overturning Roe v. Wade. Almost 25 years after Scalia’s appointment, abortion rights are still intact.

This should tell us at least two things.

One, that neither corporate political party is even slightly concerned about the Supreme Court changing our abortion laws.

Two, that Supreme Court justices often seem to change (or, at least, defy expectations) after their ascension to the bench.

Given that it really doesn’t seem to matter all that much who is picked for the court, perhaps, its also not so intelligent to make our presidential picks based on our fears about the Supreme Court?

I know it’s a pretty broad brush I’m painting with so, lets get to a finer point. There’s an issue beside abortion that all the justices seem to be on the same page about which, in the end, is probably far more important to us than any other single issue … corporate power.

Did you know that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has an office in D.C. which devotes much of its time to aiding Corporate America in its fight against the people of our country? It also spends a fair amount of its time vetting potential nominees to the court and lobbying for those who are most likely to support corporate interest and agenda.

Did you know that the single greatest trend on the court over the last several decades is that decisions in favor of actual human beings have become more and more infrequent every time corporate power is challenged? This tells me that the biggest concern workers and citizens should have when nominations are being made is the court’s continued subordination to corporate power. Like our government, the court seems to have become just one more hammer in the corporate toolbox. Just one more mechanism designed to represent those who need it least and to crush justice wherever profit is concerned.

There is a great piece on this very topic written by noted author and lawyer, Jeffrey Rosen, in the New York Times (March 2008). Its called “Supreme Court Inc” and every American who cares about justice and law and the little guy should give it a perusal.

President Obama has to come up with some appointees for the Chamber and the Senate to look at. I have a suggestion that seems politically expedient while also addressing the court’s demonstrably corporate bias.

One thing we all seem to be in agreement about is that Obama has made some absolutely terrible choices for his cabinet. He could now throw a bone to those of us in the working class to ensure that textbooks mark him as a president who (at least) tried to do one thing right. He has made it abundantly clear as he’s filled his cabinet that the interests he serves are not ours. Regardless of your political perspective, these appointments have been business as usual and show him to be every bit the sellout independents said he was all along.

In particular, if Obama wants to reverse the sting caused when he invited Tim “The Fox” Geithner to guard our economic hen-house, he needs to send Tim Geithner a clear message to those of us who work for a living that he really does want us to have a seat at the table. For those of who know that a Single-Payer health care system is the optimal replacement for our for-profit nightmare, an intelligent court pick could help remove the stinger Obama sets by refusing to even say the words, “single-payer”. Like the Clintons before him, Obama is totally in bed with the HMO’s and refuses to discuss the most rational solution.

Obama can keep being such a disappointment because, at the very least, he’s not George W. Bush. But, if he were to chose an American icon to serve on our nation’s highest court, it might go a long way towards redeeming his, so far, unimpressive (and similar) governance. It might help the many who feel betrayed to see a light at the end of the tunnel.

Where might we find someone truly principled who has always stuck up for the little guy? Someone who has always understood that deregulation is only beneficial to those seeking to rob and steal. Somebody who has fought the good fight all of his life.

The person I have in mind is a veteran, a lawyer, a professor, an author, a lecturer and a full-time American citizen. He is a graduate of Princeton and Harvard and he has left an indelible mark on populist politics in this era of big business and corporate power. For over forty years, he has been a tireless champion of every important social justice issue.

Here is an opportunity for Obama to prove that his “talk” has a little bit of “walk” in it, as well. The President could put a well-armed “hen” in our judicial “fox-house” and reassure us all that there is a tiny little piece of justice to be found somewhere in the halls of power in this beleaguered democracy of ours.

Supreme Court Justice Ralph Nader. Let that sink in.

Justice R. Nader

Just think about all the positives for a moment before your knee jerks …

Mainstream Democrats could all breathe a collective sigh of relief as Ralph would be unlikely to run in 2012. They could start to set aside their mathematically-challenged (and terribly misplaced) anger at Ralph for 2000 and start to set their own party back on a path that values democracy instead of thwarting and co-opting the growth of alternative parties. Thoughtful Democrats could finally admit in polite company that they agree with Nader on most every single issue without being excoriated.

Mainstream Republicans could rest assured that while Ralph is against corporate power, he’s also only one judge out of nine. How much damage to corporate control could he possibly do? Thoughtful Republicans could rest secure in the knowledge that very few people in our country have shown a more principled or consistent respect and defense of our laws and founding documents than Ralph Nader.

Workers and independents alike would be inspired. They could look to at least one nationally prominent figure who never forgets where he came from and who can always be counted on to do what is right in the face of enormous adversity.

What, if any, are the negatives?

What Next?

You have spent much of the past two decades of your life being told where to go, how to think, what to read, what to watch, how to behave. Far be it from me to add to the cacophony of advice that will almost certainly accompany your latest achievement but I do have one piece of advice …

You’ve done what everyone has told you was wise and reasonable and intelligent and forward-thinking and strategic. Might I humbly suggest that you consider the possibility that your happiness should be the most important factor when deciding what comes next? How many decisions leading up to today have frankly had anything at all to do with your happiness?

Its no surprise that you may be uncertain about what you want to do next. You’ve been following society’s clear cut path for over twenty years. If you are able, I suggest that you take some time off and travel a bit. Leave society briefly. Go hiking. Be in a play. Write some songs. Volunteer. Work as a dishwasher. Live with some buddies. Join the Peace Corps. Strum a guitar. Ride your bike. Watch an ant cross a field. Take the time to really kiss someone you love. Do a triathlon. Live life for just a little while before you commit yourself to any one course or path.

Don’t worry. While you may actually learn to enjoy being only marginally productive, I can almost guarantee that you will tire of it, eventually. When you do, I’m pretty sure that something will be calling you and that you will be in a uniquely receptive frame of mind to hear it when it does. I’m pretty sure that what you are supposed to do next will make itself known to you if you’re open to it.

It might be a job. It might a dream. It might be further education. It might be a talent. It might be a person or a place. But, whatever it turns out to be, you will have become self-aware enough to really know when it dawns on you. Knowing yourself outside your normal comfort zones and having an adventure or two can really help you see more clearly what it is that you truly value and what it is that you truly want. Despite what many people may tell you, what you want in this life is very important.

The happiest, most balanced people that I know are often those who say they let destiny have a place at the table when they were deciding their futures. These are usually those rare people we all know who are not stuck doing things they hate for a living. They enjoy their work. They enjoy their families. They are creative. They are passionate. I think these things are far more important than success by almost any other yardstick.

If, after some reasonable frittering, you are still unsure about what to do next, just go ahead and make a decision and start moving in a direction (any direction). I always remember my mother asking me when I was at a crossroads in my own life, “Don’t you think it is better to go in the wrong direction than in no direction at all?”

After more than twenty years of contemplating that question, I can honestly answer … “Yes, Mom. I think that it is … but I am definitely not sure.” ;-)

A Warrior Resists Deployment

If we are getting out of Iraq, why were more American soldiers killed in April than in any month since the presidential election? We actually seem to be accelerating the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan! We are constantly told that the number of actual troops in Iraq will be down to about 50,000 within the next few months but this says nothing of the “stability contractors” employed in our empire’s latest quagmire (that’s “mercenaries” for those of you who don’t like idiotic euphemisms). Currently, the U.S. has about 150,000 mercs on the payroll in Iraq.

So, given that we are escalating our resource wars, what should the peace movement be doing right now? Well, for starters, I think we should be celebrating a huge victory very few of us are even aware of.

Sergeant Mathis Chiroux, a young reservist who spent five years serving in Afghanistan, Japan and Germany refused to deploy to Iraq about a year ago. He has been waiting since for some resolution with the Army. He was told by people in the know that he could receive anywhere from a year of incarceration right on up to the death penalty if they really wanted to make an example of him.

On April 21st, he appeared before a board of Army officers in St. Louis, Missouri to explain his refusal to deploy. He told the truth. He said he felt that he was being called on to commit war crimes and that he could not participate. He also said that he could not participate in an illegal and unconstitutional war.

The hearing resulted in Chiroux being honorably discharged from the United States Army and the board allowed him to keep his G.I. Bill benefits. Did you hear about this big news?! I can only imagine that many will now also refuse to deploy (or re-deploy).

I find it amazing that this could happen with nary a peep from the mainstream media. This is a great example of the kind of information we are regularly being denied by the mainstream media. A whole lot of someones had to decide not to write about this and not to cover it on TV. That’s pretty scary to contemplate.

Chiroux is quite well-known within the peace movement for his work with IVAW (Iraq Veterans Against the War) and VFP (Veterans For Peace). Especially interesting was his testimony at the Winter Soldier hearings held in March of 2008 which were also ignored by the media.

These modern hearings were meant to emulate the “Winter Soldier Investigations” that took place in Detroit in January of 1971 at which a sizable group of Vietnam combat veterans, flying the VVAW banner (Vietnam Veterans Against War), spoke on camera for two days about the atrocities they had both witnessed and committed in Vietnam.

If you have never seen the film “Winter Soldier”, it has been out on DVD now for several years winter-soldier and I can’t recommend it enough. It’s simply phenomenal.

I also strongly urge you to read the powerful words that Mathis wrote about his trials and tribulations. His is not a typical war story. It is a very well-written description of the terribly dehumanizing effects of military training and culture and how it impacts human beings on all sides of the conflicts we are involved in.

Lets hope that the peace movement regroups and stops playing politics (Bush war bad, Obama war good). We are still very much involved in two wars and ramping up both. There are plenty of other soldiers out there standing up to the military-industrial-congressional complex who really need our help. G.I. resistance to the war in Vietnam was absolutely crucial to ending it. Please contact IVAW and make a donation today!