It is clear that the Nader Supreme Court with the addition of the two most recent appointees, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito will viciously reshape American law until the time comes when one of the five conservative justices is replaced.
The decisions by the Supreme Court involving the Washington D. C. hand gun regulations and the Millionaire Amendment dealing with political contributions clearly establishes that we now have a court driven by the right wing agenda.
Unlike the appointees of other Republican Presidents, these recent appointments made possible by the Nader effect, which gave George W. Bush the White House in 2000, are sorely lacking as legal scholars and will set aside legal precedents in their effort to rewrite the laws of the United Sates.
Keep in mind that President Eisenhower appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice Brennan, President Ford appointed John Paul Stevens, Reagan appointed Sandra Day O'Conner, and even the first President Bush appointed David Hackett Souter.
Once again conservative justices poke holes in the nonsensical right wing contention that, by definition, liberal judges and justices are 'activists.' Alito and his comrades continue to strike down laws from the bench, replacing their judgment for that of the legislative body. Exactly what conservatives contend that liberal justices do when they believe when legislative bodies over step constitutional boundaries.
The difference then is not in 'activism' but in ideological rigidity by these right wing fanatics that mocks the Constitution, weakens our government, and carries the intellectual and scholarly weight of a carp.
The Nader Court? To quote Chris Hedges:
"It was an incompetent, corporatized Democratic Party, along with the orchestrated fraud by the Republican Party, that threw the 2000 election to Bush, not Ralph Nader. Nader received only 2.7 percent of the vote in 2000 and got less than one-half of 1 percent in 2004. All of the third-party candidates who ran in 2000 in Florida—there were about half a dozen of them—got more votes than the 537-vote difference between Bush and Gore. Why not go after the other third-party candidates? And what about the 10 million Democrats who voted in 2000 for Bush? What about Gore, whose campaign was so timid and empty—he never mentioned global warming—that he could not carry his home state of Tennessee?"
Why is this not the court of one of the other 3rd party candidates? Why do you not come down hard on the 10 million Dems who voted for Bush?
Posted by: Skip | June 26, 2008 at 02:25 PM
Actually per 2000, it looks like the Rehquist court put itself in its current position thanks to the then Chief Justice, the three holdouts, and O'Connor. All of them are as responsible for this as any marginal presidential candidate.
Posted by: Why don't Dems whine about Perot? | June 26, 2008 at 02:34 PM
The assigning of responsibility to an individual or a small group for a large collective action is a pointless endeavor, especially since you have no power to punish those people.
As far as individuals are concerned, some Nader supporters regret their votes in 2000, while others would do it over again if given a chance, and indeed repeated their vote in 2004 and fully intend to in 2008. It's not our fault that the U.S. is screwed up and millions of people vote for crooks. All the big-party, big-money politicians are crooks -- just look at how Obama's friends and fundraisers keep getting arrested too.
Posted by: Jeff | June 26, 2008 at 04:20 PM
We need a 50 state Democratic Party. For years, the fools that run the national party and consultants who recieve commissions on media buys have been pursuing a 14 or so state strategy that resulted in lost elections and lucrative commissions for consultants. I can only hope Dean and Obama are successful in making this a national election.
Posted by: nonheroicvet | June 26, 2008 at 06:12 PM
I thought it was a none of the above court! Nader offered us a name to vote for, knowing that neither major party was worth the corruption, the disrespect for law, the corporate greed that would come from 'the rule of law, not men!'
The Bush corruption, the Gore corruption...and now the Obama/McCain corruption.
Scalia, Thomas, Alito, give us the law of our jungle.
Again, it's Nader or None of the Above.
Posted by: jim guilfoil | June 26, 2008 at 06:56 PM
Al Gore's father was in the Congress for 32 years. Al Gore himself served 8 years in the House, the senate and the VP post. Bopth of them were elected to all these affices by Tennessee. Al Gore couldn't carry Tennessee in 2000.
Al gore won in Florida. Instead of fighting for what was his, he folded his tent and went home.
Al Gore would have inflicted on decent Americans a running mate of astonishing stupidity and venality. Yes, Joe Lieberman was to a heartbeat from the presidency, by Al Gore's choice.
Enough of this whining about Ralph Nader the spoiler.
Posted by: jim bouman | June 26, 2008 at 10:57 PM
You could support instant runoff voting or something similar and give others a chance rather than just two parties. Clinton impeachment hearings had a lot to do with 2000 as well, even if the impeachment was frivolous.
Anyway, this post is off base for another significant reason: Justaces Roberts and Alito were appointed in Bush's second term. Justice O'Conner was on the bench until January 31, 2006. Rehnquist fought on as long as he could, until September 3, 2005.
If only the Democrats could have fought as hard in 2004 as Rehnquist did in 2005. What effect did Nader have in 2004? Very little.
So shouldn't Thursday's ruling be attributed to the Kerry/Edwards Supreme Court?
Posted by: Dan Sebald | June 27, 2008 at 01:31 AM
This supposed Nader court is just a slight upgrade from the "Perot" court we had in the mid to late 90's.
Posted by: Ron | June 28, 2008 at 07:30 PM
This is the kind of frame I'd expect from a right wing Republican.
Gore actually won Florida. He failed to fight for his win.
Ralph had nothing to do with that.
The whole notion that Nader cost Gore Florida is one of the most disgusting lies in the history of U.S. politics.
End this phony attack on America's Greatest Citizen.
Posted by: Brian | July 05, 2008 at 11:12 PM