Volume 8, Issue 38
Justice William O. Douglas coined the term in Griswold v. Connecticut. He found a right to privacy in the penumbra of the Constitution to support his belief that an individual has a constitutional right to be protected from government intrusion on private matters of intimacy (in this case, access to contraceptive devices for married couples).
What he meant by this is that, hidden in the shadows of the body of principles enumerated in the Bill of Rights, were emanating rights that further granted one control over one’s personal decisions affecting personal intimacy. The establishment of this right in part led to the finding in Roe v. Wade that a woman has an unquestioned right to an abortion.
With the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, politicians, through disrespect for her heritage, are now abusing tradition to define the Supreme Court. In the same concept of theory as the Constitution, they attempt to find in the penumbra of the Supreme Court a right to ideological philosophy. Not only is there no such right, any attempt to equate the penumbra analogy of the Constitution to the Supreme Court prostitutes the relationship intended by our Founding Fathers between the two.
The Supreme Court’s purpose is to be the supreme arbiter on constitutional issues. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not the Supreme Court. There are no shadows from which anything can emanate from the construct of the Court.
No political party, liberal or conservative, has a right to a Supreme Court seat. The selection of a Supreme Court Justice nominee should be based solely on the candidate’s moral intent to interpret laws as constitutional or unconstitutional without any respect or reference to their faith, their politics, their ideologies, or their predilections. Supreme Court Justices are the bearers of oversight for the legislative and executive branches, period. They are not purveyors of morality, values, outcomes, or destiny. The mission statement of the Court is to enforce the Constitution.
George Washington feared political parties. In his farewell address to his beloved country, President Washington was emphatic in his disdain for partisanship and political movements organized by agenda. He felt that they tended to act in self-interest only. He made the case that “the alternate domination” of one party over another through coinciding efforts to exact revenge upon their opponent have led to terrible atrocities that “is itself a frightful despotism.” (Wikipedia)
America today is in desperate need of Congressional leadership. Neither party truly protects the people’s right to self-govern. Republicans profess the need for balanced budgets and less spending. Yet they continue to deficit spend without warning of the economic effect. Democrats push for social programs unproven to realize the intended benefit. Yet they continue to demand liberal policies even to the extent of threatening freedom.
Thomas Jefferson feared judicial tyranny. He worried about Justices unchecked who would interject their personal opinions on government policy rather than simply rule on the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress. Both political parties fear that Justices will not uphold their political ideology when, in fact, both parties should rely upon the legislative process to advance their political agendas, not the Supreme Court. To trust the people in their ultimate wisdom on how they want to be governed should be the mantra of both parties.
The Constitution of the United States is the document codifying the principles that bind us in character as a nation. We have lost our consensus on our founding principles. There can be no commitment to a common future without a basic belief for the common definition of freedom.
No single individual can support universal rights unless those rights are protected for all in a constitution that represents a vision greater than the individual. Such commitment to freedom requires the potential sacrifice of one’s own gain for the overall advancement of universal freedom. This is the bane of the mission statement of a political party and, therefore, the manifestation of George Washington’s fear.
Supreme Court Justices who do not, by conscience, honor the Supreme Court’s duty to only restrict unconstitutional laws, thwart the people’s rights to self-government and democracy in the legislative process. In this dereliction of duty is the manifestation of Thomas Jefferson’s fears.
A constitution is only as good as the intention of leaders to govern by it. In 1991, Boris Yeltsin defied communist party leaders in running for President of the Russian Federation. The Supreme
Soviet Council attempted to continue the elections “until they got ahead.” This decree was in direct opposition to the Soviet constitution and had no standing in law. The Soviet government operated pursuant to a “desk drawer constitution.” They never took it out, dusted it off, read it, or intended to be bound by it. Without commitment to foundational principles, restricting power, or guiding policy, a nation ultimately has little hope. The demise of the Soviet Union is case in point.
The political debate surrounding the selection and confirmation of Supreme Court Justices is making the Supreme Court an extension of political parties to further their power and control over the people for their ideological perspectives. If the American people lose confidence in the Supreme Court as just another partisan political branch of American government, loss of confidence in self-rule will not be far behind.
The Constitution of the United States has been the greatest governing document the world has ever known. Its ratification in 1789 solidified the aspirations of humanity that there was the possibility of a future wherein birth is not destiny.
Nonpoliticalization of the United States Supreme Court is worthy of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's legacy.
Consensus commitment to founding principles of sacrificial freedom is worthy of our nation’s call upon each one of us and our trust in each other.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?