|
|
By B John Burns
January 28, 2010
It was an interesting spectacle last night to watch six Supreme Court justices sitting front row center (two were actually in the second row), taking a verbal beating from the President of the United States about a case they decided last week. Five of them, appropriately, displayed no reaction.
I agree with the President that the decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is a major defeat in the effort to recapture our so-called democracy from Big Business.
On the other hand, I worry about elected officials making political fodder out of judicial decisions, whether we agree with them or not. Especially this year.
In the next few months, we’re going to be hearing a lot of misguided rhetoric about how our state Supreme Court abandoned the Constitution in going against what some argue is the will of the people in deciding Varnuim v. Brien (the gay marriage case). The people should be allowed to vote, the argument goes, upon whether a particular class of citizens should enjoy the same level of rights as others. It was always my impression that a bill of rights was incorporated into our Constitution for the very purpose of protecting the minority against the majority and that a judicial branch, not subject to political pressure, existed to assure that those rights are not impeded. But what do I know, right?
But last night our President, a former Constitutional Law professor at the Law School from which my boss graduated, used his State of the Union address to challenge a decision of the Court.
This is what I think. I think that if President Obama, for whatever reason, wanted to castigate the United States Supreme Court for something, the President should have castigated the Court for Gore v. Bush. Finally, we have somebody on the bully pulpit who can look those guys in the eye and exclaim, “Look what you did to us! What the hell were you thinking? Look what you put us through!!”
Of course, Chief Justice Rehnquist would not have been there to hear it, but it would have been fun anyway.
 |
|
|
Criminal Procedure 4A
By B.John Burns This reference offers a comprehensive analysis of Iowa criminal procedure. It analyzes criminal procedure, including pre-trial, trial, sentencing, and post-conviction procedure. Provides a comprehensive manual covering all procedural aspects of an Iowa criminal case, from the time you are first engaged to represent a suspected or charged individual, through the final steps of a criminal appeal or state or federal post conviction relief proceeding. Separate divisions review evidentiary issues in criminal trials, constitutional provisions affecting criminal cases, and the representation of inmates in prison litigation.  
Buy Book
Who's Online
|
BTW, what do you think will happen if the IA BD of Pharmacy decides at its meeting on Feb. 17 (as I suspect it will) that marijuana has some medicinal purposes? I've been feeling a bit glaucomic lately.