Every commentator on the subject mentioned that, while Newdow's standing COULD be used to avoid the issue, that doing so would represent a monumental failure on the part of the Court to address a CLEAR violation of the Establishment Clause. The Court is, perhaps for the first time in its history, ducking an issue because they are scared of the ramifications. Congress sitting and considering an Act that would allow Congress to overrule a SCOTUS decision against their own Acts might be to blame for a chilling effect, but even if that is the case, we'd be looking at an instance of the Court ruling based on fear of reprisal rather than ruling purely on the merits of the case and the law, a situation the SCOTUS was expressly designed to avoid ever having happen. This is what lifetime tenure for Federal judges is in for, after all.
Three justices said that "under God" is constitutional due to historical reasons. Aside from showing they have failed to read the papers of the Founding Fathers, this at least shows their honesty in their position. The other five justices are hypocritical for ducking the issue. I'm profoundly ashamed of them today... and saddened for the country. We had a chance to make a step forward with this case and failed to use the chance we were given. The raving Fundies won today, and on this battleground, there's not going to be a rematch.
Actually, there probably will be a rematch. A plaintiff will be found who, unlike Newdow, has standing. The court may well find a way to weasel out again, but I'm sure this isn't settled.
At the risk of being overly cynical, I'm a bit surprised that you're ashamed of them today. We've all lived with tons (literally) of patently unconstitutional legislation, including virtually the entire corpus of the New Deal and Great Society monstrosities. While I'll never sing the praises of Congress or the Presidency (and the latter is particularly dangerous when it exceeds its constitutional bounds, which is almost always), the Supremes don't have clean hands.
Three justices said that "under God" is constitutional due to historical reasons. Aside from showing they have failed to read the papers of the Founding Fathers, this at least shows their honesty in their position. The other five justices are hypocritical for ducking the issue. I'm profoundly ashamed of them today... and saddened for the country. We had a chance to make a step forward with this case and failed to use the chance we were given. The raving Fundies won today, and on this battleground, there's not going to be a rematch.
Reply
At the risk of being overly cynical, I'm a bit surprised that you're ashamed of them today. We've all lived with tons (literally) of patently unconstitutional legislation, including virtually the entire corpus of the New Deal and Great Society monstrosities. While I'll never sing the praises of Congress or the Presidency (and the latter is particularly dangerous when it exceeds its constitutional bounds, which is almost always), the Supremes don't have clean hands.
Reply
Leave a comment