The present, unhealthy state of our Republican Democracy, similar to the medical analysis of a systemic infection, calls for an inquiry into its etiology; an inquiry useful to the specific diagnosis and treatment of the presenting malady,
It is our view that the decline in the salubrity of our body politic had its toxic advent in the case of Bush v. Gore in the year 2000. The latter, indesputably a political case, provided the etiology for the decline in principle of the United States Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”) in its constitutional role as the decisive arbiter of constitutional issues. between contending parties, individual, and governmental.
The foundationally mandated dynamic, as expressed in the constitutional strictures of “Separation of Powers,” pragmatically resulted in the denial of “Political” cases from consideration by SCOTUS. Appellants wishing to bring their cases before SCOTUS were required, as a procedural prerequisite, to file a “Motion for Certiorari,” successfully demonstrating to the High Court that no “political” issue or resulting political impact is directly or indirectly involved.
Once the prorective “gates” were opened, in Bush v. Gore, SCOTUS was then afforded the constitutionally inappropriate opportunity to express politically partisan power. The Presidential appointment of partisan Justices by Donald Trump portended a predictably tragic decline in the High Court’s objectivity in the determination of issues presented for determination. Subsequent jurisprudential history demonstrated the tragic end of the High Court’s previously deserved, venerated reputation in admirably pursuing its foundational purpose and existential constitutional responsibility.
The final death blow to the recognition of its constitutionally prescribed and proscribed authority was tragically dealt by the “Citizen’s United Case” (2010) which, purportedly, in the stated interest of “free speech”, eliminated the law on the limitastion of political contribution by corporations and thereby loosed the floodgates of corruption regarding the historic sanctity of fair and representative election’. The corruptive decline in such a historically venerated branch of our constitutionally tri-partate architecture of government was discernable in the Court’s sophomoric attempt at legal justification.
The High Court’s) exotic and unprecedented decision (5 – 4), ruled that Corporations are “persons” and that no person can be constitutionally limited in, monetary donation, which would constitute a deprivation of “Free Speech.” Such a sophomoric justification inarguably constitutes convincing proof of its cynical motivation.
Every first-year law student and virtually every entrepreneur is well aware that the legal designation of “person” (since its advent in the Elizabethan era) does not invest “personhood” to the corporate entity but is eternally and universally, understood as a “legal fiction,” affording “Limited Liability” to the individual entrepreneur as an economic encouragement to individual enterprise,] It is historically notable, that failed business owners (“Debtors”) were imprisoned in Early English history; a famous example of which practiced, is the father of Charles Dickens.
Analogous to the existence of blameworthy parents who have the tendency to produce delinquent children, the transmogrification of the United States Supreme Court from a historically venerated and existential guardian of our constitutional democracy, to an instrument responsive to political and religious influence, furnished the proximate cause of our contemporaneous body politic’s “open wound” and an empirically cogent source of concern and frustration for the traditional mainstream American citizen.
=p.
plinyblogdotcom 