Supreme Court Politics

Source: National Review, Justice Scalia’s 2014 opinion explains the rancorous battle to replace him,  by JOSH BLACKMAN, February 15, 2016

Blackman wrote, “The monastic Supreme Court is formally isolated from the political process in all respects, but one — the appointment process.”

A myth conservatives perpetuate is the removal of politics from every aspect of society.  They advocate the removal of politics from the economy by reducing government interference. They advocate the removal of politics from Supreme Court opinions.

This denial of politics in society begs the question: What do we mean by “politics”?  Conservatives want an authoritarian approach to policy and governance.  However, in a democratic society politics is the process of finding the balance between individual rights and group rights.  Instead of hidden assumptions, values and goals, democracy requires transparency and participation by society in decisions.

The politics of denial advocated by conservatives means individual rights are more important than group rights.  Based on their religious beliefs, offering a vision of individual freedom premised on absolute freedom of conscience for isolated and autonomous individuals, the Gospels ignored the reality of society.  Conservatives use religious justifications for their focus on individualism and denial of groups rights.

Denial of politics supports the conservative authoritarian agenda for dominance of society. Blackman’s narrow definition of politics applies as if society does not exist.  He writes as if the politics between the President and the Senate or Congress are all that matter without consequences to society.  As if each entity were individuals and their decisions did not have consequences for society. Conservatives would argue that no one without a constitutional law degree would understand what the Founding Fathers meant.  The logic and reasoning of conservatives justifies their conclusions.

Once we recognize the complex interdependence of our collective existence, we can no longer justify an unlimited freedom to act solely according to one’s own, too often self-serving conscience.