Sunday, March 14, 2010

Cry Me a River, Johnny

Chief Justice John Roberts has been out complaining lately about how President Barack Obama mentioned the Citizens United decision in the middle of the State of the Union Address.  These are the remarks Chief Justice Roberts is so upset about:

"With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests –- including foreign corporations –- to spend without limit in our elections. (Applause.) I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. (Applause.) They should be decided by the American people. And I'd urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems."

Roberts showed his disapproval at the time by disrespectfully shaking his head and mouthing, "not true."  Since then, he's been out whining that the Supreme Court Justices should not have to attend the State of the Union Address.  He's pretty upset about having to sit there during the applause noted above.

Think about the Citizen's United decision.  First of all, this group was originally an anti-Hillary Clinton group, and their name was Citizens United, Not Timid.  So the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a group named CUNT.  Do we really think CUNT is interested in what is best for America?  The CUNT decision is so unpopular that almost every person you speak with, regarless of their polticial affiliation, supports legislation or a constitutional amemdement to try to fix it. 

The point of the State of the Union address is for the President to update Congress on, well, the state of the union.  It has been televised since 1947.  It is the time for the chief elected executive of our country to give a report on how our country is doing.  Since 1947, it has also become a time when Presidents promote their particular poltical agenda to the country.

The Supreme Court attends the State of the Union.  No one has complained until now.  Justice Roberts has been part of a court that has handed down an extremely unpopular decision, essentially granting freedom of speech to corporations and making coporate bribes legal, and he cannot take the heat.  He had no problem sitting through George Bush's addresses.  The judicial branch of our country should not cite judicial independence in order to get out of an uncomfortable moment in an annual traditional speech.

John Roberts's whining and crying about this makes him appear more partisan and less politically independent than his actual decisions do, if this is possible.

1 comment:

  1. The Citizens United decision did accomplish one thing. It replaced Dred Scott as the ultimate low in US jurisprudence.