Will The Supreme Court Decide Another Election?



elcivics.com

The voting public remembers well the Bush-Gore election of 2000.    Especially the Democratic Party.  The Supreme Court happened to get involved in that election and for some, decided who won the Presidency.  All sins are forgiven of course and we enjoyed eight years of President George W. Bush.  As we approach November and the Presidential election between President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, one wonders if the Supreme Court will once again influence the outcome of the election.

Sometime in the next two weeks, the Supreme Court of the United States will rule on the Affordable Healthcare Act.  Most pundits and legislative leaders believe that the Supreme Court will rule the legislation unconstitutional.  They may choose just to overturn the mandated coverage but they may also rule to overturn the entire piece of legislation.  Many constitutional scholars believe the court will rule in favor of the legislation.  Everyone on both sides of the issue await the Supreme Court decision with great anxiety. 

zimbio.com

For the Republican Party, a favorable ruling by the Supreme Court will be seen as a huge victory over the President and likely a positive election result in November.  For the Democratic Party, an overturn of the Affordable Healthcare Act holds an entirely different meaning.  There is no question that an unfavorable ruling for the Democrats by the Supreme Court would be seen as a significant loss.  However, it would provide an impetus that the Democrats need for November.

An overturned Affordable Healthcare Act would embolden the Democratic Party, specifically the base.  There has not been a piece of legislation as important as health care to the Democrats for a very long time.  Losing it because the Supreme Court overturns it will be a call to action for the Democratic Party.  Failure on such a grand scale, similar to the election of 2000, provides greater impetus than any other action that could take place. 

The Supreme Court is largely divided as the nation and our legislative bodies.  Presidents appoint the justices and not having President Obama in office provides the opportunity for additional conservative justices to be appointed.  Nothing scares the Democratic base more than that thought alone.  If and when the Supreme Court overturns the Affordable Healthcare Act, look for the Democratic Party to get energized in a big way.

The Supreme Court may be thinking they are just ruling on the constitutionality of a piece of legislation.  They may indeed be helping decide another Presidential election.  The time draws near for a decision.      



Obama's Preemptive Choice On Immigration-So Be It!

fairimmigration.org

Republicans have slammed President Obama for his recent policy change regarding the deportation of young illegal immigrants.  Mitt Romney has made it clear that he believes the President’s move is for political purposes only.  So be it.  Immigration reform is long overdue and if it took the President to preemptively change policy usurping Congressional authority, so be it.  Romney and his Republican Party complain that the President’s timing is all about gaining the Latino vote come November.  Romney continues to put forth that the President has had over three years to deal with immigration reform and has chosen to make this policy shift prior to November’s election.

One gets Romney and the Republican Party being upset about the policy shift.  The Latino voting bloc across the nation is critical and carrying the Latino vote by a significant margin may be the difference come Election Day.  President Obama has made the Dream Act a priority from day one of his presidency.  He gave Congress over three years to deal with the legislation and they have failed to act and craft long-term immigration reform.  So he changed the Administration’s priority and made it clear that he will no longer deport young illegal immigrants.  Will it help his reelection?  You betcha. 



salon.com



The new policy states that people younger than 30 who came to the United States before the age of 16, pose no criminal or security threat to the United States, and were successful students or served in the military can get a two-year deferral  deportation.  This language is nearly identical to much of what is contained in the Dream Act.  It’s a good plan and deals with illegal immigrants in a fair and compassionate fashion while protecting the security interests of our nation.  The policy change also allows those meeting the requirements to apply for work permits.  Participants must be in the United States now and be able to prove that they have been living in the country continuously for at least five years. 

President Obama’s administration deported nearly 400,000 illegal immigrants during the calendar year of 2011.  This is a significantly higher number of deportations than we have seen in years. The policy change implemented by the President will affect nearly one million people.  The change will allow the Administration to change focus slightly to target resources at those illegals posing a greater threat such as criminals and those trying to enter the country now. 

Congress has refused to work with President Obama in nearly every fashion regarding the issues of our day.  Not all the blame falls on Congress but given the track record of legislative accomplishment, it is crystal clear that the President has been more willing to find compromise with the Republicans than they with him.  The attitude of wanting the President to fail has been the Republican mantra.  President Obama made it very clear over a year ago that he would do what he could independently of Congress should they fail to work with him through negotiation and compromise.  So be it. 

Two-thirds of the people in the nation support this policy change on immigration.  Romney has not said he will overturn this Executive Order should he win the Presidency.  He has long said that he would pretty much overturn everything that President Obama has put in place.  Romney knows that the policy is a good short-term fix and is just disappointed that the President put in place prior to the election shoring up his support within the Latino community.  

Can The Justice Department Convict Anyone?



people.com



Today’s news that Roger Clemons was exonerated on all six counts levied against him by the United States, I have to wonder if the Justice Department can ever convict a high-profile case.  Just a week ago, John Edwards was found not guilty of the charges against him.  Thomas Drake of the National Security Agency and Ted Stevens, the Alaskan Senator both walked away without accountability. 

I believe as all Americans believe that every accused citizen of a crime is entitled to their day in court.  This is the American way and such rights are guaranteed under our constitution.  I would not have it any other way nor do I feel that there are exceptions to the rule.  The frustration with the Justice Department is their failure to properly prosecute each of these cases.   Laws were clearly violated.

I am happy that the law affords every opportunity for an individual to plead their case and that the substance of proof is always with the prosecution.  However, it seems that our Justice Department’s batting average is failing when it comes to these high profile cases.  There does seem to be a correlation between those who can afford to hire the best representation in the court room.  We really don’t seem to see this same occurrence with non-high profile cases.  The average American who commits a crime generally goes to jail. 



manolith.com



Remember the Dream Team that represented OJ Simpson.  That seems to be the beginning of where the defendant armed with the best legal representation started to be successful in beating the government.  All of these high profile cases involved lots of money and the best legal representation that money could buy.  Having money seems to help imbalance one’s chances in the court room. 

Even less egregious crimes such as driving under the influence and other similar non-violent crimes seem to be all about money.  Those of us who can afford an attorney and pay some fines can watch such charges disappear.  No question the court is over-burdened with these types of cases but still, having money and being able to use it to your advantage always affords you a favorable outcome. 

The government has spent millions of dollars to prosecute these high-profile cases.  An unfavorable outcome is always a waste of our nation’s resources.  My writing does not suggest we forego pursuing those who perpetrate crimes but rather that our Justice Department do a much better job of securing guilty verdicts.  Watching the likes of John Edwards, Roger Clemons and Ted Stevens walk away free from accountability leaves a bitter taste in one’s mouth.  Fortunately, I am not sure any of these men will be able to live out their lives in the fashion that they could have had they not fallen prey to their transgressions. 

Justice does come in all types of fashion and form.