After President Obama's State of the Union address last Wednesday, I had some very mixed feelings. Sure there was the taking responsibility for the deficit spending, the continued push for healthcare reform, and mention of the climate change bill that many thought dead. This was all important, but the most prominent negative feeling that I got from the speech was about President Obama's attack on the Supreme Court, and it led me to thinking of only one man: Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu, more commonly referred to as simply Montesquieu.
For those not familiar with Montesquieu, he developed the theory of separation of powers, a theory that much of the western political system is based off of. In our government, this idea manifests itself through the three branches of government: the legislative, the executive and the judicial. With each branch only having certain powers, and the ability to balance the power of the other branches, one branch cannot attain enough power to truly dictate everything that happens in the country. This idea safeguards some of the things that democracy loving peoples all around the globe take for granted.
President Obama went against separation of powers last Wednesday in one of the most frightening acts of pseudo-intimidation of the Supreme Court that has ever been seen. Some right-wing commentators have said that the entire State of the Union speech was in a defiant tone; I just believe that the speaking out against the Supreme Court was.
President Obama addressed the Supreme Court's recent decision on campaign finance; a decision that got rid of restrictions on corporations for donating to campaigns. President Obama expressed how incredibly upset he was with the decision since, in his mind, it allows for special interests to control elections, or at least have much more of a say in what happens with the elections.
The problem with him bringing this up was that all of the democrats started standing up and cheering (for anyone who has watched a State of the Union address, this is not uncommon.) The makeup of the House and Senate however, led to the effect of the Supreme Court justices, who were sitting front and center for the speech, surrounded by democrats applauding the president, and by doing so, all expressing their discontent with the court's decision. Intimidation method? Possibly.
Some in the media don't see this action as such an outrage. There's been a lot of talk since the speech about how previous presidents have done the same thing by addressing the Roe v. Wade decision, but this is far different. President Obama was taking issue with a court decision that was made only a week prior, he surrounded the justices with his supporters, and in a way, accused the supreme court of allowing substantial special interests into the election process now.
Separation of powers is more important than most people realize. If the legislative and executives branches were not bound by judicial review, the legislatures could pass any law that they wished without having to take in mind the rights of the people of America enumerated in the constitution; with the exception of possible repercussions in re-election. All of the things that most Americans take for granted; from freedom of speech to the right to bear arms, are protected by the Supreme Court and their judicial review ability.
This is why possible intimidation of the Supreme Court should worry America. Lately, Congress has been passing more laws and regulations; this is just a fact. There needs to be a branch of government that can constitutionally draw the line on all of these new laws and regulations coming out of Washington. An intimidated, or even somewhat intimidated, Supreme Court might not put their foot down where they should and allow the envelope to be constitutionally pushed even further.
President Obama ran a campaign of change, but fundamental things like separation of powers have no business being changed. An America where legislative or executive branches overtly challenge the decisions made by the Supreme Court is not the sort of America I want to live in. President Obama is in many ways a very great legal mind, so it should be no news to him how important the Supreme Court is, and how their decisions should not be guided by the thoughts and wills of legislators.
Be the first to comment on this article!