Bush v. Gore & Citizens United

These two cases by the supreme court have striking similarities. First they are both targeted at elections. Bush v. Gore essentially secured George W. Bush's first term presidency. Citizens United is also made during a critical election time that will heavily favor Republican congressmen by lining their pockets with more corporate funding. Most importantly, both cases are a 5-4 split between the conservative and liberal members of the court. In both cases the justices in the minority do not simply write a decent but write a scathing decent accusing the majority for making illogical arguments and ignoring decades of court precedents while focusing on novel niches in others.

It is also curious that both of these cases completely contradict the conservative's court stance on federal and states rights. Bush v. Gore stepped into a debate with the Florida state government asserting that the state law was unconstitutional in allowing Gore to recount votes in the 2000 election. The decision is so novel that it is unlikely to be used as precedent for any type of law and it is largely seen as a political play by the court to declare a conservative as president to replace the conservative justices about to retire. Citizens United uses the bill of rights to declare corporate personhood allowing corporations to spend much more on political campaigns. It largely ignores the actual content of the case to make a (some say insane) stretch declaring corporations equal to real people. They make this argument using a tactic using a precedent that they have been largely using to over rule other cases. The same goes for Bush v. Gore. It largely relied on precedents made by the liberal Warren court to justify their ruling. The minority view in both cases took an opposing stance on bases they would normally support. This obviously smells like a partisan fight and not a fight for justice.

Citizens United will no doubt have an immediate positive effect on the Republican party who have in the past decades been in favor of deregulating big business. The Supreme Court have shown their political bias clearly in Bush v. Gore. Yet the politicking done by the court is not in the interest of the American people. It is done to promote a conservative agenda and to fortify the conservative majority within the court.

The Citizens United case has polled disfavorably with most Americans, yet the actions of the court are largely invisible. People chide the Democrats for not being effective. They sight their slight majority in congress and a Democratic president without noting the third branch of the federal government. Currently it is staffed with ideological remnants of the Reagan and Bushes. In congress we have political gridlock over healthcare, but in the Supreme Court, longstanding civil rights cases are being tossed in the dumpster with out much attention.

The Court has always been making political decisions. Whether it be seen in hindsight as favorably (plessy v. ferguson) or inhumanely cruel (dred scott v. sanford). Yet this court is purposely nosing deeper and deeper into elections of the two other federal branches which is unique in history. This undermines separation of powers and creates an atmosphere where each branch is nestling inside each other rather than being critical. It might even get sloppy if Republicans take the majority of congress. Two branches will then be right leaning while only the executive branch will have a liberal majority and probably the most limited in influencing legislation or interpreting it. America is still under the shadow of Reagan era ideologies that have recently proven suicidal. The purging of these toxic politics will take a lot longer than I think most people hope for.