It is neither the role nor responsibility of the Supreme Court to address and find a remedy to the problem of excessive money and its undue influence in the political process.
All the Court can do is determine the constitutionality of remedies the government sees fit to enact to solve the problem. And when the Court invalidates such acts, it does not do so with the intent or desire to allow the problem to persist, rather, itÂ’s done to allow Congress to revisit the issue and find a remedy that passes Constitutional muster.
Consequently, this concerns the First Amendment, where itÂ’s ultimately the responsibility of each citizen to educate himself as to the issues and candidates and vote in an informed manner.
I don't think I could disagree more, "THE LIFE OF THE LAW HAS NOT BEEN LOGIC; IT HAS BEEN EXPERIENCE"
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
Human nature and recorded history suggests your comment is naïve and factually incorrect. We have a representative democracy and expect those who represent us, in all three branches of our government, to govern fairly and without bias - the Roberts Court fails that test.
And I couldn’t disagree more – for the law to retain its legitimacy it must be applied consistently, where the sole role of the judiciary is to subject laws to review and determine whether or not they are repugnant to the Constitution.
To safeguard our civil liberties laws that fail to meet a given standard of judicial review must be invalidated, placing necessary and proper restrictions on the state.
The problem, therefore, is subjective partisanism, not the rulings of the Court.
This is why rulings such as
Citizens United and
McCutcheon are similar to
Roe v. Wade; in
Roe the Court invalidated laws that sought to deny a woman her right to privacy. Just as it was not the role or responsibility of the
Roe Court to ‘solve’ the problem of abortion, so too was it not the responsibility of the
Citizens United Court to solve the problem of campaign financing.
In both
Roe and
Citizens United the Court made the correct determination, safeguarding citizens’ civil liberties at the expense of the state – leaving their respective problems to the people to resolve via the democratic process, where the people were disallowed to violate their fellow citizens’ Constitutional rights pursuing ‘remedies’ offensive to the Founding Document.
