Tuesday, June 26, 2007

New SCOTUS shows its true colors

By Libby

I figuratively yelled myself hoarse on the blogs, begging people not to vote for Bush because he was going to load SCOTUS with ideologues. When he nominated Alito and Roberts, I was on my knees pleading with the Democrats and the voters to fight these nominations. I said this court would destroy the gains we've made over the last 50 years anyway, and I take no comfort in being right.

Of course, being a long time drug policy reformer, I was vitally interested in Bong Hits for Jesus. Unsurprisingly, the court ruled against free speech for students. They framed the ruling in the context of "protecting" students from illegal drug use, as if a banner was going to a cause young people to run out en masse to find their nearest pot dealer, but the message that the students will be getting from this is once again, what they think doesn't matter. It's bad enough we subject kids to random pee tests and send armed storm troopers with dogs into their schools on random searches, now they're not even allowed to talk about drugs - even if they're not on school property, which I think is the most troubling aspect of the decision. Way to promote informed debate SCOTUS. Small wonder that teenagers have no respect for authority when they're shown none themselves by those who hold it.

The only good thing about the decision was the dissent, and I thought it rather remarkable that this language, via HuffPo, was included in it.
But just as prohibition in the 1920's and early 1930's was secretly questioned by thousands of otherwise law-abiding patrons of bootleggers and speakeasies, today the actions of literally millions of otherwise law-abiding users of marijuana, and of the majority of voters in each of the several States that tolerate medicinal uses of the product, lead me to wonder whether the fear of disapproval by those in the majority is silencing opponents of the war on drugs. Surely our national experience with alcohol should make us wary of dampening speech suggesting -- however inarticulately -- that it would be better to tax and regulate marijuana than to persevere in a futile effort to ban its use entirely.

It's the one bright spot in the whole sorry debacle that the court would finally articulate the senselessness of the WOsD. Meanwhile, that's not the only bad decision coming from Bush's appointees. The court also ruled that Bush's personal welfare program for religious charities couldn't be challenged by ordinary citizens because it's funded by executive order and not the Congress.

Steve Benen points out this is not quite as odious as it appears at first blush, since it's also narrowly tailored but I still think it's a very dangerous and wrong-headed ruling. It shouldn't matter where the money comes from. As long as it's our tax dollars being passed out, any citizen should have the right to petition for redress. Besides, the court's contention that nothing horrible came to pass from the over $2 billion that has been handed out to religious groups, is simply false. There are numerous instances of the charities mis-using the funds in ways that promote a specific religion.

Michael Stickings has more thoughts, and a good collection of links to the best analysis but I think he puts it best. The court just pissed on the people in this round. But what's truly depressing is that Roberts and Alito are young men and they'll continue to do so for the rest of our lives and the next generation's too.

One can only hope that in 08 people will remember that this is what happens when you elect Republicans.

Labels:

Bookmark and Share

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home