For several years I have suspected that the Justices of the United States Supreme Court are a group of very well educated people who are bereft of common sense.
I first began to have this suspicion in 2010 when it handed down the Citizens United decision in which it declared that corporations had a First Amendment right to spend unlimited amounts of money to support or oppose a candidate or ballot issue because it constituted “Free Speech.”
In short order there was an explosion of nonprofit “social welfare” or “trade association” groups who could accept unlimited donations and did not have to disclose the donors. This led to the term “dark money” being coined to describe such contributions.
The flood of “dark money” into these organizations on both sides has turned the American political world into a giant cesspool.
It is estimated that a successful presidential campaign will need to raise one billion dollars for the 2016 campaign. Much of that will be “dark money” going from the non-profit “social welfare” or “trade association” groups to super-pacs supporting the various candidates.
Needless to say, this limits the field of potential candidates either to the wealthiest who can self-finance or those willing to do the bidding of the “dark money” donors. The day in which “anyone could grow up to be President” untarnished, is past.
What ultimately confirmed my suspicion about the Supreme Court occurred this week when it decided the case of McDonnell v. United States. The Court unanimously reversed the public corruption conviction of Robert McDonnell, the former Governor of Virginia, who had accepted $175,000 in loans, gifts and other benefits from Jonnie Williams. Williams was a businessman who owned a herbal supplement that he wanted research tested by the Virginia public universities and McDonnell arranged meetings between Williams and the state officials including hosting them at the Governor’s mansion.
A jury convicted McDonnell after a five week trial during which it heard the circumstances surrounding the gifts and the arranged meetings on counts of bribery and honest services fraud. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.
In reversing the conviction, the Supreme Court found that arranging the meetings did not constitute an “official act” by the Governor because they did not require the Governor to use his authority to make a decision or exert pressure on another public official to do so. It went on to conclude that setting up constituent meetings was a routine function of public officials and did not constitute an official act.
It’s hard to see Jonnie Williams as nothing more than Santa Claus.
It doesn’t take a soothsayer to predict that this restrictive interpretation will make it more difficult to prosecute public corruption.
Lyndon Johnson once extolled the backgrounds and talents of the various members of John F. Kennedy’s cabinet to House of Representatives Speaker, Sam Rayburn, calling them the “best and the brightest the country had to offer.” Rayburn is said to have replied; “That may be true, Lyndon, but I’d feel a little better if one of them had run for sheriff once.”
That might not be a bad qualification for the next Supreme Court Justice.