The Supreme Court is, and always has been, a political institution. That would be self-evident if not for the mystique that has been built up around America's most important judicial body. That aura has started to dissipate a recent Monmouth University poll found that more than half of Americans disapproved of the court's recent performance but it remains powerful enough that people take Chief Justice John Roberts seriously when he bemoans the supposed politicization of the Supreme Court. Before his retirement, Justice Stephen Breyer even published a book urging Americans to return the high court to its supposedly august and apolitical roots.
Now that the justices are evidently poised to overturnRoe v. Wade,those who insist (or imagine) that the Supreme Court must somehow remain above politics have become even more strident: Pro-choice advocates argue that the impending decision proves that that the high court has strayed from its constitutional mission, while the anti-abortion contingent insists that since judges are above politics their reasoning is unassailable and the presumed leaker has immeasurably damaged the institution.
RELATED:The fall of Roe v. Wade will only embolden the fascists: How will America respond?
These arguments are almost stunning in their historical ignorance. For one thing, the framers of the Constitution basically said nothing about the Supreme Court's mission, describing it simply as "one supreme Court." The Judiciary Act of 1789, passed during the first year of George Washington's presidency, fleshed out what the court would do, including assigning it six members (a chief justice and five associate justices; that number was officially expanded to nine in 1869). For more than a decade, however, the court took on few cases and had very little to do. The executive branch had proved strong under Washington and Congress quickly took on various legislative roles, but the judicial branch was initially unclear about exactly how much power it really had.
Chief Justice John Marshall understood something important: the appearance of putting partisanship aside would serve to legitimize more partisan decisions in the future.
Politics changed that. After John Adams lost to Thomas Jefferson in the 1800 presidential election, he decided to stack the judiciary with members of his Federalist Party so that Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans couldn't implement their agenda. Yet some of the justices' commissions were delivered prior to Jefferson's inauguration, and since the new president believed that nullified their appointments, he instructed Secretary of State James Madison not to deliver them. One such appointee, Maryland businessman William Marbury, sued Madison, claiming that his appointment was legal and the government should be required to follow through with it.
Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.
Marbury likely believed that Chief Justice John Marshall, who was also a Federalist, would be sympathetic to his case; if so, he miscalculated Marshall's ability to play the long game. Apparently more intent on increasing his own power than aiding his political party, Marshall authored the landmark 1803 decision which agreed with Marbury that Madison's actions were contrary to law, but added that since the law involved was itself unconstitutional, it was not valid. So the precedent was established that the Supreme Court could strike down laws that it determined were in violation of the Constitution which also launched the notion that the court was above politics.
Except it totally wasn't. What Marshall understood was that the appearance of putting partisanship aside would help legitimize the court's future decisions even when they were blatantly partisan. (Arguably, the Roberts court's ruling that preserved the Affordable Care Act, while disappointing many conservatives, played a similar function.) In Marshall's case, this meant that the Federalist Party's remained relevant long after the party of Washington and Adams had faded away. Future justices sought to preserve the mantle of legitimacy Marshall had bestowed, even when they used it for very different causes.
Consider the most infamous Supreme Court decisions of the 19th century:Dred Scott v. Sanfordin 1857 andPlessy v. Fergusonin 1896. In the first of those, the court ruled that an enslaved man in Missouri named Dred Scott could not claim to have been freed when his owners took him to Illinois and the Wisconsin territory, jurisdictions where slavery was illegal. In ruling against Scott, Chief Justice Roger Taney, an avowed white supremacist, found that people with African descent "are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word 'citizens' in the Constitution," and as such had no legal rights. (As Salon'sKeith Spencer recently noted, it is conceivable that people seeking abortions will face similar states' rights issues after Roe is overturned.)
Going one step further, the court ruled that the Missouri Compromise an 1820 legislative agreement that sought to limit the expansion of slavery in newly-added states or territories was unconstitutional. Of course the justices claimed this decision was based purely on legal issues, but the historical consensus holds that it was politically motivated. Incoming President James Buchanan, who supported the Southern slave-owner aristocracy even though he was from Pennsylvania, exerted pressure on the court to side with the pro-slavery faction, and probably heard about the decision from Taney in advance.
AfterFranklin D. Roosevelt was elected, the politically-motivated tendency to "find" reasons why laws regulating business were unconstitutional went into overdrive.
Politics again trumped the law inPlessy v.Ferguson,which required the court to rule on whether Louisiana had violated the 14th Amendment by segregating railroad cars. Since the amendment held that whites and Black Americans were equal under the law, this created a logical conundrum. Yet the justices, clearly motivated by a desire to avoid alienating white supremacists, evaded that common-sense argument and found that accommodations could be "separate but equal." The lone dissenter, John Marshall Harlan, called out the blatant political logic at play:
Everyone knows that the statute in question had its origin in the purpose not so much to exclude white persons from railroad cars occupied by blacks as to exclude colored people from coaches occupied by or assigned to white persons. Railroad corporations of Louisiana did not make discrimination among whites in the matter of accommodation for travelers. The thing to accomplish was, under the guise of giving equal accommodation for whites and blacks, to compel the latter to keep to themselves while traveling in railroad passenger coaches. No one would be so wanting in candor as to assert the contrary.
While those decisions upholding racial discrimination are the most obvious examples, politics has influenced numerous other Supreme Court decisions as well. While the Republican and Democraticparties have in many respects traded places as "liberal" or "conservative" formations since the 19th century, both have largely supported a social consensus favoring the interests of business over those of workers. It appears clear that when judges are appointed by politicians (in this case, nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate), their philosophies are likely to be shaped by politics. The Supreme Court has a long history of handing out decisions unfavorable to labor organizing or working people, even if they are presented in neutral-sounding legal language.
For instance, the 1899 decisionLochner v. New Yorkoverturned a law setting maximum working hours for bakers on the grounds that it violated the right to freedom of contract; that supposed right came up again in 1923, when the court overturned a minimum wage for women inAdkins v. Children's Hospital. (That ruling, by the way, came under Chief Justice William Howard Taft, a former president. That's the only time a former president has been on the Supreme Court, although Taft's successor as Chief Justice, Charles Evans Hughes, was a former Republican presidential nominee.)
AfterFranklin D. Roosevelt was electedin 1932, the politically-motivated tendency to find reasons why laws regulating business operations were unconstitutional went into overdrive. There were four justices on the Supreme Court who clearly loathed FDR's policies, and were determined to short-circuit his agenda however they could. Nicknamed "the Four Horsemen," Justices Pierce Butler, James Clark McReynolds, George Sutherland and Willis Van Devanter viewed themselves as ideological crusaders on a mission to take down a president they perceived as a dangerous socialist.
Roosevelt tried to solve the problem in 1937 through what is now called "court-packing" specifically, by adding a new justice each time a current one passed the age of 70 but refused to retire. We'll never know whether that might actually have made the Supreme Court less political, but in the event the plan blew up in Roosevelt's face. His only consolation came in the form of an unexplained change of heart by Justice Owen Roberts, who had previously opposed the New Deal but voted to uphold Washington state's minimum wage in the case West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish. That deflated Roosevelt's court-packing plan and solidified the entirely fictional notion that the high court was above politics, or at least was supposed to be.
Yet not much the court has done since Roosevelt's era has made that notion more plausible than it was before 1937. In 2000, it installed George W. Bush as president in a 5-4 ruling that could not possibly have been more nakedly partisan. A decade later, inCitizens United v. FEC, the high court's conservative justices managed both to side against Hillary Clinton and assert that corporate campaign expenditures were effectively political speech, and could not be regulated under the First Amendment.
More recently, of course, the Supreme Court confirmation process has become the focus of Machiavellian politics, largely because of Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who refused to consider Barack Obama's nominee in 2016, arguing that it was an election year, but pushed through Amy Coney Barrett's 2020 nomination just days before Joe Biden was elected. Add to that the firestorm that surrounded Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation in 2018, and it's almost bizarre that anyone can pretend the court is not infused with politics. Those three justices nominated by Donald Trump, of course, have created the conservative supermajority that has led to the near-certain downfall of Roe. That makes the court appear more political than ever before, perhaps but appearance is not the same thing as historical reality.
Read more on the Supreme Court and the fall of Roe v. Wade:
See the article here:
Did the Supreme Court just become "political"? God, no it's always been that way - Salon
- Why are Jamaicans forced to live in poverty? - Jamaica Gleaner - October 29th, 2023 [October 29th, 2023]
- The ultimate price - The Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting - October 29th, 2023 [October 29th, 2023]
- Cornyn, Cruz lead another GOP delegation on border tour of RGV - Brownsville Herald - October 29th, 2023 [October 29th, 2023]
- Landworkers' Alliance Report: Debt, Migration, and Exploitation - Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants - October 29th, 2023 [October 29th, 2023]
- Searching for wholeness in a nation fractured by capitalism and ... - Kansas Reflector - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- Explainer: The State of Poverty and Slavery in Ecuador - JURIST - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- That AI You're Using Was Trained By Slave Labor, Basically - Futurism - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- Bibb Announces Ten Winners of $5000 Restaurant Grants to ... - Cleveland Scene - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- Sugarcane Burning Is a Plague on These Black Floridians Mother ... - Mother Jones - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- 18 of the Most Haunted Places in Alabama - AZ Animals - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- Immigration Health Surcharge: equality impact assessment 2023 ... - GOV.UK - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- Books The common cause - Morning Star Online - September 3rd, 2023 [September 3rd, 2023]
- Search warrants executed in alleged human trafficking and slavery ... - ACT Policing News - September 3rd, 2023 [September 3rd, 2023]
- Modern slavery and human trafficking: identifying and reporting ... - GOV.UK - September 3rd, 2023 [September 3rd, 2023]
- Report: Government needs better policies to help narrow economic equity gap - Yahoo News - September 3rd, 2023 [September 3rd, 2023]
- New Zealand criminal investigation into systemic migrant worker ... - WSWS - September 3rd, 2023 [September 3rd, 2023]
- What back to school means in the era of PragerU - Reckon - September 3rd, 2023 [September 3rd, 2023]
- The Jacksonville Shooting and the Far Right - Left Voice - September 3rd, 2023 [September 3rd, 2023]
- Build support for today's union struggles The Militant - The Militant - June 2nd, 2023 [June 2nd, 2023]
- Work requirements wont affect the debt ceiling but they will stir up ... - The Boston Globe - June 2nd, 2023 [June 2nd, 2023]
- Ten Percent of North Koreans Forced To Work as Slaves: New Report - The New York Sun - June 2nd, 2023 [June 2nd, 2023]
- Anti-Slavery Commissioner visits the Coffs Coast - News Of The Area - June 2nd, 2023 [June 2nd, 2023]
- Former Server Says Customers Should Tip If They Ask Questions - The Daily Dot - June 2nd, 2023 [June 2nd, 2023]
- New exhibition looks at the UK's role in indenture labour - ianVisits - June 2nd, 2023 [June 2nd, 2023]
- UNITED WE STAND: THE FIERCE URGENCY OF NOW - Savannah Tribune - June 2nd, 2023 [June 2nd, 2023]
- No, MLK Was Not a Christian Nationalist - Word and Way - June 2nd, 2023 [June 2nd, 2023]
- Fact check: Tipping began amid slavery, then helped keep former Black ... - December 28th, 2022 [December 28th, 2022]
- Slavery - Wikipedia - December 28th, 2022 [December 28th, 2022]
- Social class - Wikipedia - December 23rd, 2022 [December 23rd, 2022]
- Author Ibram X. Kendi speaks in Portland on legacy of slavery and the tipped wage - Press Herald - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- As a Nation, We are Doomed to Fail if the 'Original Sin' of the Past is not Reconciled in the Present - CT Examiner - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- Lincolnshire car wash owners handed 10-year slavery order - Lincolnshire Live - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- "Under The Banner of King Death" puts pirates in their place in the history of workers' rights - Boing Boing - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- Forrest Hylton | To the Lighthouse LRB 18 October 2022 - London Review of Books - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- Aussie Brands Among Most Improved in 2022's Ethical Fashion Report But There's Still a Long Way To Go - Broadsheet - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- DC voter guide: 2022 election what you need to know - WTOP - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- Exploring the Fault Lines in Mental Health Discourse: An Interview with Psychologist Justin Karter - Mad in America - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- Iran: 'Society has risen to overthrow the Islamic Republic' - Green Left - October 19th, 2022 [October 19th, 2022]
- Slavery by any name is wrong: the push to end forced labor in prisons - The Guardian US - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- Abortion, Marijuana, Slavery: 11 Themes to 2022 Ballot Measures - The Epoch Times - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- Visions of Progress tells tales of two Charlottesvilles, Black and white - Bristol Herald Courier - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- Miss Malini's job advert puts spotlight back on 'exploitative bosses' and a 'pittance' as salary - Moneycontrol - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- As Hurricane Ian Threatens Florida's Southwest Coast, What's Happening On The Ground - KPCC - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- Truths about student debt, college costs, and corporate freeloading on the backs of students. - Daily Kos - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- The Kohinoor, Cullinan and the enduring demand for reparations across the colonial world - The Indian Express - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- Divine Politik: The rise of robots should be the downfall of capitalism The Daily Free Press - Daily Free Press - September 14th, 2022 [September 14th, 2022]
- Stop romanticizing the lives of 1950s housewives - Halifax Examiner - September 14th, 2022 [September 14th, 2022]
- Domestic workers, long excluded from labor protections, call for codified rights - The 19th* - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- Pierre Poilievre Claims He's a Friend of the 'Working Class'. He's Spent Years Attacking Canadian Workers. - PressProgress - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- Stockard on the Stump: Governor declares he didn't violate the Little Hatch Act Tennessee Lookout - Tennessee Lookout - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- How Central American immigrants played a vital role in the U.S. labor - Fast Company - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- The unity imperative: Lessons for building the anti-fascist alliance - People's World - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- How FrontLine Farming Is Using Land to Grow Food and Heal Generational Trauma - 5280 | The Denver Magazine - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- Queen Elizabeth II Reigned For 70 Years: Here Are The 10 Longest-Reigning Kings And Queens Of The UK - Forbes - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- Ballot initiatives to watch in 2022 midterms, from abortion to slavery - USA TODAY - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- 10 Songs That Deal with Labor Rights and Hating Your Job - MetalSucks - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- Conflict and modern slavery: the investment perspective - Schroders - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- The Santa Cruz County boom town that went BOOM - The Mercury News - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- This Labor Day, buy produce grown only on farms that respect workers rights - The Hill - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- The unity imperative: Lessons for building the anti-fascist alliance - Communist Party USA - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- Agency visits US to share efforts to end fisher abuse - - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- High income tax in PNG is a disincentive - POST-COURIER - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- For women of color in care work, racial and economic inequities abound, report shows - The Boston Globe - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- Opinion | Behind the Rise in Union SupportAnd the Challenge Ahead - Common Dreams - September 7th, 2022 [September 7th, 2022]
- Slavery and Trafficking Risk Order imposed on Lincolnshire car wash owners - Forecourt Trader - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- Opinion | The Tide Is Turning: US Congress Finally Considers a National Domestic Workers Bill of Rights - Common Dreams - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- Edited Transcript of ADH.AX earnings conference call or presentation 22-Aug-22 1:30am GMT - Yahoo Finance - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- Conservatives Explain Why They Are Preparing For A Civil War - The Onion - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- 10 Black Millionaires Who Got Busted By The IRS For Failure To Pay Taxes - Moguldom - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- 34 Great Records You May Have Missed: Spring/Summer 2022 - Pitchfork - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- Amazon Hit by Strikes Across the Globe - Novara Media - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- The Past, Present, and Future of Work - YES! Magazine - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- National Trust members: get ready to choke on your carrot cake - The Guardian - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- Lost Yet Connected in Time: Brown, Peltier, Melaku-Bello, Abu-Jamal, and Assange - LA Progressive - August 23rd, 2022 [August 23rd, 2022]
- Mondelz commits to living wage for cocoa farmers and invests in education programmes for children - ConfectioneryNews.com - July 27th, 2022 [July 27th, 2022]
- Opinion | The Supreme Court Has Too Much Power and Liberals Are to Blame - POLITICO - July 27th, 2022 [July 27th, 2022]
- Breaking the stranglehold of speculative property ownership | interest.co.nz - Interest.co.nz - July 27th, 2022 [July 27th, 2022]
- Why fashion should act now to legislate living wages in the supply chain - Drapers - July 27th, 2022 [July 27th, 2022]
- Georgia's six-week abortion ban goes Into effect, an attack on... - Liberation - July 27th, 2022 [July 27th, 2022]
- 10 years on, what is the true legacy of the London 2012 Olympics? - Metro.co.uk - July 27th, 2022 [July 27th, 2022]