Al Mayo: Supremely Correct — The Court Does Its Job Well

The United State Supreme Court. Just typing those words can throw certain groups and people into a frenzy. The SCOTUS has a unique place in American culture. No other body has the ability to stir anger and happiness so quickly, to so many diverse factions. Never in my memory has the court proven this more than in the past three days.

Striking down portions of the landmark Voting Rights Act, then striking down The Federal Defense Of Marriage Act, and backhandedly striking down California’s Proposition 8 that prohibited gay marriage. I am no attorney, and don’t profess to have a brilliant legal mind, but it strikes me every time SCOTUS makes a major ruling, just how well this system works. I know already some are howling at me for writing this, but hear me out.

I have followed confirmation hearings for many SCOTUS justices and failed nominees. There have been nominees that were turned away and those who sailed through with ease. But the one thing I always noticed after they were confirmed, was a sense of duty and unity within the court itself. Yes, there have been justices who remained either conservative or liberal no matter what the case or decision. But in more cases than I can count, the court has pleasantly surprised me. DOMA is one of those cases. Justice Anthony Kennedy was considered ultra-conservative when first appointed to the court, but he actually sided with the majority in the DOMA decision and even wrote the majority opinion. I can safely say Ronald Reagan had no idea one of his SCOTUS appointees would be the deciding Justice in an issue like this.

Less than a year ago it happened again. Ultra-Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the majority in upholding ObamaCare. That came despite a full frontal campaign by Kennedy to bring him back to the conservative fold. If you ever wondered how chummy and collegial things are behind the scenes in SCOTUS, I urge you to read, “The Bretheren” by Bob Woodward. It’s a fascinating look at how things really work. I suspect Roberts had a difficult decision, but ultimately went with his interpretation of the law.

I guess what I’m really driving at, is that it eventually matters very little what a nominee’s political leanings are when they ascend to the high court. What matters is their love of law and country. There are many like Robert Bork who were turned away and in retrospect it seems like the right thing was done. Then you have those like Clarence Thomas who don’t do much on the court at all other than take up space and vote their politics. But for every one of those, there are three who ascend to the bench, and give this country stellar service. William O. Douglas, Thurgood Marshall, Warren Burger, Harry Blackmun, Sandra Day O’Conner, all proved themselves as patriots by making the right decisions regardless of politics or philosophy.

Are they always right? Absolutely not. But that’s the genius and beauty of the American government. It concedes we are a government of law, but acknowledges that law is not finite. Law is an evolving, living entity which has to be watched, and changed as society and the country evolves.

Love ’em or not, the Supreme Court does its job well, and we are all better for it.