Of course the US Senate is a corruptible and fully corrupted institution which should not exist in it's current rule-from-above form which enables plutocracy and imperialism. Likewise, mostly, the US Supreme Court, with rare exceptions, Roe V Wade being by far their best decision that comes to mind, amidst a lot of other reeking decisions, like Bush V Gore and those relating to campaign finance.
But given that you have any kind of supreme court, one obvious requirement for justices is to speak the language of impartiality. Best if they were to actually practice it, of course, or at least a certain kind of impartiality which looks at the good of society and therefore the best possible interpretations of law.
Even with the truthfulness of the accusations of sexual assault by Kavanaugh uncertain (I'd rate the testimony against him so far as sounding highly likely), his reaction to those accusations shows the epitomy of an unjudicial temperment. A truly judicial reply would have gone like this:
"I do not recall such events. As no one's memory is perfect, this doesn't mean they necessarily didn't happen. Some may say an an investigation is warranted; I leave that question of law to my investigators in the Senate Subcomittee. Furthermore, I do not consider them entirely relevant to my nomination. Much as many people, I had an alcohol problem in my youth, and got involved with activity I should not have. That is true, and I truly apologize for any harm I may have caused back then. Nobody one ever confronted me for my actions back then [I've nixed any such memories too] so I had not, and do not now, believe their results to have been permanently harmful. And 35 years ago I sobered up and became the family and community leader [paternalistic corporate hack] I am today, with a history of the best personal behavior and public service [manic destructiveness in the interests of corporate and state oppression]. I suggest we move onwards [for more complete social destruction]."
Instead, we got angry denialism (which more suggests guilt more than not), and partisan flame throwing. That display, in itself, should have been fully disqualifying.
We all know the story...he wasn't on the plutocrat think tank list because many well knew he had a history...but George W saw in this guy a likeness of himself (and activities George W himself continued well into his 30's) and made him Circuit Judge, and then Trump saw in him the opportunity to select an unmitigated proponent of Presidential powers and freedom from prosecution, characteristics that would also appeal to Geroge W.
I won't say this destroys the legitimacy of the Court simply because it hasn't had much of that in a long time. But it certainly shows "the devil may care" attitude toward maintaining that fiction anymore.
Meanwhile, the whole fracas made it easer to avoid talking about Trumps new Drug War Globalism, forcing drug war terms on Mexico and Canada, and scolding about it at the UN.
The Drug War is a another major form of national and international oppression, in the service of crushing leftism and poor people.
But given that you have any kind of supreme court, one obvious requirement for justices is to speak the language of impartiality. Best if they were to actually practice it, of course, or at least a certain kind of impartiality which looks at the good of society and therefore the best possible interpretations of law.
Even with the truthfulness of the accusations of sexual assault by Kavanaugh uncertain (I'd rate the testimony against him so far as sounding highly likely), his reaction to those accusations shows the epitomy of an unjudicial temperment. A truly judicial reply would have gone like this:
"I do not recall such events. As no one's memory is perfect, this doesn't mean they necessarily didn't happen. Some may say an an investigation is warranted; I leave that question of law to my investigators in the Senate Subcomittee. Furthermore, I do not consider them entirely relevant to my nomination. Much as many people, I had an alcohol problem in my youth, and got involved with activity I should not have. That is true, and I truly apologize for any harm I may have caused back then. Nobody one ever confronted me for my actions back then [I've nixed any such memories too] so I had not, and do not now, believe their results to have been permanently harmful. And 35 years ago I sobered up and became the family and community leader [paternalistic corporate hack] I am today, with a history of the best personal behavior and public service [manic destructiveness in the interests of corporate and state oppression]. I suggest we move onwards [for more complete social destruction]."
Instead, we got angry denialism (which more suggests guilt more than not), and partisan flame throwing. That display, in itself, should have been fully disqualifying.
We all know the story...he wasn't on the plutocrat think tank list because many well knew he had a history...but George W saw in this guy a likeness of himself (and activities George W himself continued well into his 30's) and made him Circuit Judge, and then Trump saw in him the opportunity to select an unmitigated proponent of Presidential powers and freedom from prosecution, characteristics that would also appeal to Geroge W.
I won't say this destroys the legitimacy of the Court simply because it hasn't had much of that in a long time. But it certainly shows "the devil may care" attitude toward maintaining that fiction anymore.
Meanwhile, the whole fracas made it easer to avoid talking about Trumps new Drug War Globalism, forcing drug war terms on Mexico and Canada, and scolding about it at the UN.
The Drug War is a another major form of national and international oppression, in the service of crushing leftism and poor people.
No comments:
Post a Comment