WEEKLY WARNING WORDS
November 3, 2004 - Week 59 - Two Decent Courtiers
BY DR. BRUNO J. KEITH
At this moment we are beginning to learn that this presidential election is less about Iraq, Afghanistan, our economy, our education & health issues than the right to appoint the next 3, or even more, justices of our Supreme Court. To make these appointments & confirmations by the Senate more partisan, Bork & Meese claimed & lied that Republicans always supported the choice of genuine constitutionalists who interpreted the true meaning of the Law while Democrats wanted only liberal judges who were prone to expand their hidden (hideous) desires of legislating by court judgment.
The appointment of Bush II on the world's presidential throne by 5 of our Supremes proved the reversal of this felonious theory. It should also induce students of our Constitution & the careers of our justices to strive for unpolitical, non-partisan veracity.
John Jay, (John Rutledge) & (Oliver Ellsworth) saw few English laws to work with &, therefore, didn't judge the post of Chief Justice worthwhile. John Marshall, Secretary of State, jumped to his chance & drastic conclusion. He did nothing but legislate. He put President & Congress in their modest places & made his opinions, his prejudices & his strongarm conclusions the Law of the Land.
Who dares talking about conservative preservation of our Constitution when studying Marshall's warbled - warped thoughts which led to his decisions in the notorious & basic "legislation" which were Marburg v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland & Fletcher v. Peck. Nor had his fellow - justices the courage, or decency, to contest his egocentric, egoistic & class-conscious royal proclamations. With them he legislated our exploitative capitalism as virtual head of our economic, social, political & legal statism. Can anyone deny this Marshalling of oppressive powers?
By contrast, we had at least two great & independent justices of the Supreme Court who disliked being considered (narrow-minded) strict constructionists of the Constitution. Yet, even in the most frequent minority, they saw themselves as humane & studious legalists who had understood the necessity to translate ancient suppression of the underdog into culturally acceptable pronouncements worthy of becoming decent Laws for succeeding generations.
Even right-wing re-slaves, old fogies & modern fog exhalers cannot deny the liberal spirit of our now ancient Constitution for its time in obvious rebellion against the Mother of Parliaments of inherited royalty monopoly so well expressed by our most glorious Oliver W. Holmes & his frequent ally Louis D. Brandeis. Both proved without presumptuous narzissism that anyone deeply rooted in a Christianity of the heart with the soul of a Son of Man in the style of the great Jewish prophets could sometimes move mountains or head a heavenly protest against the judicial maligners of the human race & their inborn, but too often inert, humanistic expectations.
Compared to John Marshall's superpower of over-powering imperiousness & piratical - buccaneering zest good Oliver stood long alone for economic, social & political freedom against contra-Constitution aggrandizement of greedy reactionaries until he was joined by an equally wise & courageous Louis. Their righteous thinking and splendid expressions often shamed the justices who remained the bulwark of shameless exploiters of human misery; weak constitutional wordiness was hiding their personal approval of reenslavement politicking.
Most poets & writers seemed to be proud of Holmes when his pen put the English Laws into the dock by showing that the reiteration of ancient legalism did not have the dignity of a constitution. It was nothing but narrow perversion of old Roman Canon Law & Orthodox philo - bustering at that. Loudly & clearly our foremost Justices demanded logic & fairness blown into antiquated outpourings.
Thus, Civil War hero Holmes opposed his close English friends of fame & his Dixiecratic neighbors of conservative preservers. That suited Theodore Roosevelt fine. This President was the true activist who loved to hear the new-times attack on John Marshall's Southern hegemony & unrestrained reyoking a supposedly free American worker under the commercial - industrial tyranny by commandeering extreme judicial restraint instead of steadfastness based on the Constitution.
As the aging Oliver Holmes began to feel a lonely & frustrated constitutionalist, President Wilson dared sending him a worthy partner in his unequal judicial resistance. Louis Brandeis, though of Bohemian traditions & a great Zionist, had become a greater American by his love of the modern spirit of our old Constitution. Of like mind, they became likely friends, allies & fellow - fighters against absurd canon - stickiness.
This first great consumer advocate whose stirrings resulted in protective legislation now became the first Jew of the Supreme Court in spite of Taft Lodging his anti-semitic protests. In spite of many defeats of this splendid alliance they were planning the pathway for F.D.R.'s New Deal Legislation which freed the lowly - paid workmen for half a century until our sham - Christian revolters bought our government, our Presidency & our elections at a bargain price. Of our greatest justices only Holmes & Brandels deserve the title supermen & super-legalists yet modest model humanitarians.
Week 60 - November 10, 2004 - Why Johnny Can't Read.