U.S. Supreme Court in Pocket of Business

[marmar]

© Tucson Citizen


from the Working Life blog:



U.S. Supreme Court in Pocket of Business

by Jonathan Tasini
Sunday 19 of December, 2010


Here we are living at a time of the greatest class warfare in at least half a century. It is almost impossible to form a union legally in the U.S.--corporations have all power in the workplace. We have the greatest divide between rich and poor in 100 years. And now comes some clear evidence of something we probably knew: The United States Supreme Court is doing the heavy lifting for corporate America.

From today's NYTimes we learn that business, particularly via it's mouthpiece The Chamber of Commerce, is getting its way even more so today that at any time in the past fifty years:

The chamber now files briefs in most major business cases. The side it supported in the last term won 13 of 16 cases. Six of those were decided with a majority vote of five justices, and five of those decisions favored the chamber’s side. One of the them was Citizens United, in which the chamber successfully urged the court to guarantee what it called "free corporate speech" by lifting restrictions on campaign spending.

The chamber’s success rate is but one indication of the Roberts court’s leanings on business issues. A new study, prepared for The New York Times by scholars at Northwestern University and the University of Chicago, analyzed some 1,450 decisions since 1953. It showed that the percentage of business cases on the Supreme Court docket has grown in the Roberts years, as has the percentage of cases won by business interests.

The Roberts court, which has completed five terms, ruled for business interests 61 percent of the time, compared with 46 percent in the last five years of the court led by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who died in 2005, and 42 percent by all courts since 1953.

Those differences are statistically significant, the study found. It was prepared by Lee Epstein, a political scientist at Northwestern’s law school; William M. Landes, an economist at the University of Chicago; and Judge Richard A. Posner, who serves on the federal appeals court in Chicago and teaches law at the University of Chicago.

Next to the U.S. government, who is the voice most listened to on the Court?:

On the center’s 30th anniversary in 2007, Carter G. Phillips, who often represents the chamber and has argued more Supreme Court cases than any active lawyer in private practice, reflected on its influence. "I know from personal experience that the chamber’s support carries significant weight with the justices," he wrote. "Except for the solicitor general representing the United States, no single entity has more influence on what cases the Supreme Court decides and how it decides them than the National Chamber Litigation Center.(emphasis added)"

And that trend is rapidly accelerating:

A study prepared by the Constitutional Accountability Center, a liberal group, examined the center’s success rate in the Supreme Court. It found that the positions supported by the chamber prevailed 68 percent of the time in the Roberts court, compared with 56 percent in the last 11 years of the Rehnquist court, a period without changes in the court’s membership. (emphasis added)

This has very practical effects for all of us. We all know the odious Citizens United case. But, look at what this means for the water we drink and air we breathe:

In one of the cases, Theodore B. Olson, who had served as solicitor general in the administration of President George W. Bush, persuaded the court not only to hear the case but also to rule for his client, making it easier to dump mining waste into an Alaskan lake.

Yes, Ted Olson, who we rightly should praise for his defense of gay marriage in California, is one of the premier legal guns for business.

Frankly, we should be not particularly surprised here. It makes sense that the Robert court will tilt towards business interests and the "free market".

But, it is worth considering, then, why the 2012 elections are so crucial. We know a lot can change in two years and I know a lot of people are pissed--rightly so--at the Democratic Party. But, consider the long-term effects for generations if we allow the executive branch and the Congress to fall into the hands of the very party that will aggressively push the failed "free market" ideology via policies that those folks will rightly be confident will be upheld by a business-friendly Supreme Court.

Oh no.


http://www.workinglife.org/blogs/view_post.php?content_id=15056

[valerief]

1. That's them. The NASCAR nine. nt