FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Liars’ Bench

Photo Source Supermac1961 | CC BY 2.0

No one is such a liar as the indignant man.

– Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra

Defense lawyers are wondering what the impact of Brett Kavanaugh’s elevation to the United States Supreme Court will be on criminal law in the United States.  The question is not purely academic.  What we now know is that, thanks to the manipulations of Mitch McConnell whose appearance has caused some to refer to him as “Chin,” (notwithstanding their normal practice of eschewing ad hominem attacks) and Simpering Susan’s 40 minute defense of her unprincipled vote, we now have two confirmed liars sitting as Justices.

To understand how this came about, it is necessary to recall the last year of the administration of Barrack Obama.  President Obama, as readers will recall, was the last man to occupy the White House whom we could call “president” without gagging. The events that gave rise to Brett’s elevation were born in 2016.

In February of that year, Justice Antonin Scalia died.  As contemplated by the Constitution, in March of that year, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland, a judge from the D.C. Court of Appeals, to serve as Justice Scalia’s replacement.  The next step in that process was for the Senate to advise and consent to his appointment. If it declined to consent, the nomination failed.  If the consent was given, the appointment was completed and the new Justice sworn in.

In an unprecedented move, Chin refused to permit the Senate to debate the nomination.  Thus, he asserted a right that no majority leader in the Senate had ever before asserted.  He decided he alone could veto the nomination of any individual to the Supreme Court or any other federal court, if it suited him, by refusing to permit his co-equals in the Senate to consider the nomination. As a result, Merrick Garland’s nomination was never considered.

Chin apparently had a better sense of how the election that followed in 2016 would come out, than did much of the rest of the country.  Had Hillary Clinton become president, Chin’s failure to act would have had no consequence insofar as the makeup of the Court was concerned.  As it happened, the unimaginable and unexpected occurred, and before the first year of the new administration had ended, the Republican controlled administration had caused to be installed on the United States Supreme Court, a new conservative justice whose appointment insured that the Court would continue to move sharply to the right.

That was not, of course, the only good fortune bestowed on the White House fool in his attempt to continue to move the Court in a right wing direction. The next did not involve the death of a Justice.  It involved a retirement.

In June of 2018, Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement.  For reasons not publicly disclosed, Justice Kennedy, who had enjoyed being the swing vote on the Court in many cases, decided to cast his last swing vote in the most important decision he would ever make while serving on that Court.  He decided to retire before the 2018 elections.  By doing that, he guaranteed that even if the Democrats regained control of the Senate, they would not be able to select, as his successor, a person more reliably liberal than he, because the vacancy created by his resignation would have been filled before the election took place. He guaranteed that his successor would be a person favored by the extreme right wing in the United States. And it was Justice Kennedy’s decision to announced his retirement when he did, that led to Brett’s appointment.  And that leads us to the question posed at the beginning of this discussion.

What effect will the presence of two known liars sitting as Justices on the United States Supreme Court, have on decisions made by that Court, especially, but not exclusively, in criminal cases.?  The question is important, since both Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh were well served by the lies they told during their confirmation processes. The question, therefore is, will they, having been well served by their lies, be more sympathetic to criminal defendants who were convicted because of lies they had told in the activities that led to their convictions.  It is entirely possible that those kinds of defendants will find at least two Justices who, having been well served by lies in their professional careers, will be sympathetic to others who used lies to advance themselves. Time will tell.

(As a totally irrelevant aside to this column I cannot resist observing that Leslie Stahl, in her unbelievably inept interview with the White House fool on “60 Minutes” on October 15, 2018, may have done more to help Republicans in the upcoming elections than any absurd comments from the mouth of the fool, of which there were many, and none successfully challenged by Leslie.  CBS and “60 Minutes” were a disgrace to journalism.)

 

More articles by:

January 17, 2019
Stan Cox
That Green Growth at the Heart of the Green New Deal? It’s Malignant
David Schultz
Trump vs the Constitution: Why He Cannot Invoke the Emergencies Act to Build a Wall
Paul Cochrane
Europe’s Strategic Humanitarian Aid: Yemen vs. Syria
Tom Clifford
China: An Ancient Country, Getting Older
Greg Grandin
How Not to Build a “Great, Great Wall”
Ted Rall
Our Pointless, Very American Culture of Shame
John G. Russell
Just Another Brick in the Wall of Lies
Patrick Walker
Referendum 2020: A Green New Deal vs. Racist, Classist Climate Genocide
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Uniting for a Green New Deal
Matt Johnson
The Wall Already Exists — In Our Hearts and Minds
Jesse Jackson
Trump’s Flailing will get More Desperate and More Dangerous
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party: Part Three
January 16, 2019
Patrick Bond
Jim Yong Kim’s Mixed Messages to the World Bank and the World
John Grant
Joe Biden, Crime Fighter from Hell
Alvaro Huerta
Brief History Notes on Mexican Immigration to the U.S.
Kenneth Surin
A Great Speaker of the UK’s House of Commons
Elizabeth Henderson
Why Sustainable Agriculture Should Support a Green New Deal
Binoy Kampmark
Trump, Bolton and the Syrian Confusion
Jeff Mackler
Trump’s Syria Exit Tweet Provokes Washington Panic
Barbara Nimri Aziz
How Long Can Nepal Blame Others for Its Woes?
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers’ Strike: When Just One Man Says, “No”
Cesar Chelala
Violence Against Women: A Pandemic No Longer Hidden
Kim C. Domenico
To Make a Vineyard of the Curse: Fate, Fatalism and Freedom
Dave Lindorff
Criminalizing BDS Trashes Free Speech & Association
Thomas Knapp
Now More Than Ever, It’s Clear the FBI Must Go
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party: Part Two
Edward Curtin
A Gentrified Little Town Goes to Pot
January 15, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
Refugees Are in the English Channel Because of Western Interventions in the Middle East
Howard Lisnoff
The Faux Political System by the Numbers
Lawrence Davidson
Amos Oz and the Real Israel
John W. Whitehead
Beware the Emergency State
John Laforge
Loudmouths against Nuclear Lawlessness
Myles Hoenig
Labor in the Age of Trump
Jeff Cohen
Mainstream Media Bias on 2020 Democratic Race Already in High Gear
Dean Baker
Will Paying for Kidneys Reduce the Transplant Wait List?
George Ochenski
Trump’s Wall and the Montana Senate’s Theater of the Absurd
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: the Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Glenn Sacks
On the Picket Lines: Los Angeles Teachers Go On Strike for First Time in 30 Years
Jonah Raskin
Love in a Cold War Climate
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party
January 14, 2019
Kenn Orphan
The Tears of Justin Trudeau
Julia Stein
California Needs a 10-Year Green New Deal
Dean Baker
Declining Birth Rates: Is the US in Danger of Running Out of People?
Robert Fisk
The US Media has Lost One of Its Sanest Voices on Military Matters
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail