Bad Judges: The Need for A Democratic Trifecta

The latest Alito news is another data point on the need for judicial reform. We are not even going to have a chance for significant reform without control of the federal government. 

The presidency is fundamental. Trump is a menace to our country. The inability to even consider prosecuting him [even Georgia's trial will be held in abeyance on supremacy grounds -- states won't be allowed to prosecute a sitting president] is but one problem. 

There is a good op-ed ("Brian Greer was a lawyer in the Central Intelligence Agency’s Office of General Counsel from 2010 to 2018.") about the "inexcusable" delays in the documents trial. Of course, given the rules in place, Jack Smith cannot do much. There is a very high bar in place before an appeal would be successful. If so, the system is f-ed up.  

We have yet another legal expert making the case that Judge Cannon is not only incompetent, but she is also biased. I have seen people say the government has no chance of winning while also granting objectively it should be an easy case. She is likely aiming to be nominated as an appellate judge by Trump.  Admit it. It is not just that she is a judge appointed by Trump or inexperienced. She is blatantly biased. 

People need to bluntly say the system has to change. Asha Rangappa, a lawyer and former FBI agent, argues Alito should be impeached:

Justice Alito should be impeached. I don’t say this lightly, and this is not something that you do simply bc you disagree with a judge’s judicial philosophy. But he is deeply corrupt, irreparably biased, and legit bonkers. From the undisclosed trips to the weird letter in WSJ to public comments responding to criticism to flying the flag upside down in support of Trump/Jan. 6 (!!!!!!) to talking to FOX NEWS (??!?!??!!!) how in the freaking world can this Court be taken seriously??

Yes, he decided to talk to a friendly Fox News reporter (people have released a photo of the person with Mrs. Alito). Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse noted that without an official ethics investigation process, we are left largely in the dark. The Earth 2 option, perhaps, is impeachment. 

[The same applies to Justice Clarence Thomas, who I have long felt warrants impeachment. The latest is just more of the same here.]

Just like it was with Trump? We were assured that impeachment was not necessary. The criminal justice system would provide an alternative. In a Catch-22, we then were told that was inappropriate as well. 

The system in place is fixed.  The idea self-regulation by the Supreme Court is an adequate alternative is also ridiculous. I say this while granting that pressure can provide limited solutions. A dictator does not have to worry about being voted out. However, public pressure provides some safeguards. And, this is present in our more democratic system as well. 

The limits of the voluntary ethics guidelines show the limits of this approach. Basis civics teaches us about checks and balances. Nonetheless, the current majority refuses to adequately provide them. Republican senators angrily rejected even a subpoena of Leonard Leo and Harlan Crow.  This underlines the need for a trifecta to give us a shot. 

Knocking on wood so hard that my knuckles are sore, I think there is a good chance that both Biden and the Democrats in the House will win this fall. I am seriously concerned about the U.S. Senate, now divided 51-49. The few "reasonable" Republicans include Mitt "Biden should pardon Trump" Romney. Or, Susan "Kavanaugh is fine" Collins.

Maryland is one of the essential seats to pick up. It is now an open seat with former half-reasonable Republican governor Larry Hogan running. He now has come out as supporting codify Roe v. Wade. 

The Democratic proposal is not to his liking, however. He supports the one put out by Collins. Right. You know, the person who assured us Kavanaugh was fine. He argues that it is necessary to obtain a majority. 

First of all, obviously, that would require Democratic control of the House of Representatives. Second, it is unlikely that sixty senators will support it. Thus, and the NYT article does not cover this part, there would have to be an exception to the filibuster. Would he support that too? 

Senator Hogan would help empower the Republicans to control the Senate and do a lot of damage. This is true even with Biden as president. Biden will have to limit who he selects since Republicans would have the power to block anyone. I don't think the Senate would just refuse to confirm anyone. But, they would clearly make things harder for him.

Abortion rights are essential. Nonetheless, they are not the only thing necessary to secure a sane government. Republicans, who over and over again have aided and abetted Trump (even the "reasonable one"), have no business controlling any of the branches of the federal government.

People are rightly angry at the latest Alito news. The current supermajority is in place because of Trump's picks and Alito and Thomas. Chief Justice Roberts too though he didn't go along with the total overturn of Roe v. Wade. Why did we not have a trial of Trump in D.C. in March? The Supreme Court delayed it. [No, the answer is not "Merrick Garland."] I severely doubt this is because of Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson.  

So, the guy with the Stop the Steal flag flying over his house and the other guy whose wife texted a 1/6 conspirator about GITMO. Sen. Dick Durbin demanding Alito not be involved in any 1/6 related cases is as useful as his letter to Chief Justice Roberts to do something. 

Democrats demanding a binding ethics process or no funding is a better idea. Things like that won't stick without a trifecta. There might be ways to play "hardball" without control of all three branches. But, true change requires it. The Affordable Care Act required control plus sixty votes in the Senate. Now, there is more chance the filibuster won't block change. 

We can correct people when they say things like "Biden should expand the Court." But, when people condescendingly say nothing can be done about Judge Cannon without granting the system is broken for that being so, I draw the line. People who say the system is severely troubled regularly do not want to make the hard choices necessary to change it.

Bones in one of the Star Trek movies (not the inferior reboot) told Kirk he gave the team a fighting chance. A trifecta in November will do the same. Meanwhile, we need to know the stakes and fight back in the various ways open to us. 

When I say "us," I mean the people in government and each one of us. Being informed, speaking out, and doing what we can in our day-to-day lives included. 

==

Bonus: One other thing to toss in is the need to reform the enforcement of congressional subpoenas. This should be a bipartisan effort because it affects both sides. It is too long in coming. 

The long saga to provide some consequences to Stephen Bannon's stonewalling the House of Representatives is a case study. 

Will he finally have to serve a few months in jail and pay a few thousand dollars in fines? Time will tell. It should not be a years-long odyssey to enforce congressional subpoenas. 

A comment online suggested why it was appropriate that Bannon over and above most others was prosecuted:

Distinguishing facts I can see: the gravity of the underlying investigation [January 6th], the relation of the principal to the item under investigation, the materiality of the information being sought, the political stunt factor, and the plausibility of executive privilege.

I think we should have a process where people cannot stonewall Congress while writing books about the stuff they refuse to show up and talk about. The current House of Representatives is controlled by clowns who have clown show hearings but the investigatory power of each house of Congress is a fundamental part of its work. It needs to be reformed.