Thurgood Marshall was the first black man to serve on the U.S.S.C. After 21 years of service, he resigned in 1991. Upon leaving he suggested the Court was leaning toward "ideology over reason".
Thurgood Marshall was the first black man to serve on the U.S.S.C. After twenty-one years of service, he resigned in 1991. Upon leaving he suggested the Court was leaning toward “ideology over reason.”
The Supreme Court is the only branch of government that has no outlined ethical standards. The members have a lifetime appointment. Now 70% of Americans polled believe the U.S.S.C. is no longer objective. Any citizen or political group that denies that the above is now taking place is living on another planet.
Power, money and questionable religious connected positions now may be in play in some Court decisions. The framers of our Constitution had no preference for any particular religion and desired a Court that remained reasoned and objective over matters that come before them. But actions coming out of the Court have the appearance of dark money (untraceable) and advocacy groups putting pressure on the U.S.S.C. judges. Some use entertainment (dinners) and S.C. Foundation contributions. Are members of the Court being wined and dined to impact objectivity? The average citizen (me) is entitled to know.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution had no desire for a theocratic government. The U.S. Constitution states: “No religious test to hold office.” Jesus Christ said, “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”
For those who study the Court’s positions—they sometimes lack the judicial spirit of truth. Like the medical profession, the U.S.S.C. should be held to a position of “do no harm.” We see Court allowed voter suppression and lack of stare decisis over abortion laws. To many of us, it is wrong to be wrapped in so many twisted words to fit a jaded program of personal interpretation, connected to outside links of political pressure.
Is the Court entering into an era of responding to pressure groups?
The Federalist Society and many other right-wing groups override the American Bar Associations’ choice of nominees to the U.S.S.C. What gives with that one? The Court has a duty to advance and protect a just society without picking personal favorites brought on by outside pressure.
We need sunshine, we need transparency—we need ethics to apply to the Court. The Court must earn a professional reputation by not being afraid to open up over their social and political activities.
The revolutionary spirit of 1787, that seeks truth and validity in government also applies to the United States Supreme Court.
Comments