Hating On the HIgh Court

THE SUPREME COURT in recent years has become an even more despicable institution than it has historically been. Historically, the so called "high court" has gone low, sanctioning slavery and racial segregation, among other evils. In all fairness, the problem is not always that the court misinterprets the United States constitution; often the problem is that the United States constitution is a poorly written document, badly in need of improvement and updating, sanctioning evils, like slavery. Arguably, it is redundant and foolish for the manufacture, sale, and consumption of alcoholic beverages to be prohibited, then legalized again, all in the same document, for instance. Then too, for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives, a darkly pigmented person ought arguably to be considered five fifthe of a human being, rather than the original constitutional three fifths. And so forth, and so on. The second amendment is a masterpiece of vague and confusing words, with too few words conveying too little precise, specific meaning. Hence we have spent centuries trying to decide whether or not one must be a member of a well regulated militia, whatever that is, in order to possess and/or carry and/or bear a firearm, and whether said firearm must be a muzzle loading musket, as per the founder's intent, or can inclule AR- 15 assault rifles. And so forth. Currently on the high court there are two probable sexual predators, and six people total who firmly believe that the United States government, and or the various state governments should have control over all women's reproductive processes, limiting their freedom and choices. This is especially ironic, since these conservative justices embrace an ideology which in all other cases insists that the less government involvement in people's lives the better. The fact that the court as currently and historically constituted consistently renders highly questionable, indeed incorrect decisions is evidenced by the sheer frequency with which it reverses them later. Supreme Court justices receive lifetime appointments in order to render it impervious to political intrigue. Obviously, this method does not work well. The court has always been politicized, from the time of George Washington to today, and remains so today, becoming ever more so. Justices are elevated to the high court because rather than in spite of their personal political biases, or, better yet, despite having any discernible political biases at all. There are remedies, remedies requiring fundamental change. Term limits would break up the monopoly of nine, and provide justice from a wider segment of the people, we the people. Thousands of people are well qualified for the Supreme Court. Its not rocket science, but rather, understanding of the law combined with simple reason. Perhaps an expansion of the court with mandated ideological balance would improve its ability to render justice undre law, something which, in its current state, it does only when its gets lucky.