Tai-Chi Tu
Tai-Chi Tu


Issue 5:

The Supreme Court Of The United States

�These are the times that try men's souls ...
Tyranny, like Hell, is not easily conquered; ...
yet we have this consolation with us,
that the harder the conflict,
the more glorious the triumph."

Thomas Paine, "The American Crisis" pamphlet

�The cruelest lies are
often told in silence."

Robert Louis Stevenson

[It may seem strange that I include the Supreme Court as an issue in this series, but if we remember that the issues we examine here are issues that affect �ALL� the citizens of the United States, and their resolution is such that this same �ALL citizens� will continue to reap equal and impartial justice under the law, then we see that there are many problems that now are ingrained in this court, including its formation, makeup, purpose and continuance. Perhaps, this is not only an issue, but, in fact, the most important issue we face in this country today, for its resolution will decide whether the purpose of this country�s founding was indeed achieved, or merely perverted, through corruption and deception, into something other than the �liberty, and justice for ALL� it was meant to be.]

The purpose of the Supreme court was, supposedly, the interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, as pertains to laws passed by local and federal government, and all legal issues pertaining to the jurisdiction and participation of this same government and its parts in relation to such; also the rights of the people and the individual states in regard to these same matters. In the end, this really boils down to the interpretation of our primary judicial documents as they pertain to the equal and impartial �liberty, and justice for ALL�, which this country�s citizens fought a revolutionary war to obtain. An important issue imbedded in this is that issue I already covered in the previous essay �Beliefs Belong To ALL�, so I will not touch on that here.

Once written, a document must be, for the rest its valid lifetime, interpreted. Also, if it is a document of legal bearing, it must be interpreted, in the light of its written value, as to the time it is being interpreted in. An old document, like our Constitution, must not only be interpreted as to its strict �written� meaning, at the time of its writing, but also as to the �spirit� or purpose of its construction at that time, which gives this meaning, a meaning and legitimacy apart from that time. A document is fixed in the time of its writing, but its meaning always lives in the present with the interpreter, who interprets it in the context of his or her present situation (see the essay: �Philosophical Musings � Interpretation and Meaning�). Further there is a neaning that never changes! & .

Also, in using human reasoning to interpret that document�s meaning, we must assume a base, or set of axioms, upon which that document relies to find its own meaning; and, in the case of our foundation documents that would be the charter of this country�s independence, the Declaration of Independence, which sets forth the basis of that interpretation ! .

I annunciated this as the above phrase: �liberty and justice for all�, gotten from the "unalienable rights" mentioned there, to be �self evident� of �all men�: �� that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.� And, assuming the rule of law, as part of this, as the very existence of this court confirms, we include the phrase, beyond that of �liberty�, thus: �� and justice for all.� Thus, we have annunciated the underlying axioms of the Constitution�s interpretation as one phrase: �liberty and justice for all.� The Constitution, in its interpretation by the Supreme Court, is thus the document that outlines the limits and responsibilities allowed by all, to all, in order to always achieve the above axiom assumed by all.

How the Supreme Court, in its present form, abridges or compromises this, we will now investigate.

Today, we nominate and appoint the justices of the Supreme Court by political partisan bias. In fact, political partisan bias is an assumption taken for granted in their nomination and appointment. Bias, as to party politics, also makes the assumption that decisions will be guided by such.

This is an abridgement of the whole point of having a �bias free court� dedicated to the ALL, the very existence of parties, denies!

The revolution was created for this very reason, to produce a government that represented the ALL the nation is, instead of the biases of the FEW the English Crown, at that time, represented.

Also, the clumping together of issues under a party banner is itself a heinous abridgement of the rights of citizens to deal with all issues as separate, and unconnected to any bias whatsoever. This is also the abridgement of the right to private belief as I covered before (see the essay: �Beliefs Belong To ALL�).

What is even worse is the effect this has, even if only subconsciously, on the population of our Nation. If the population begins to accept this �platform thinking� instead of the true unbiased thinking that formed this Nation, then the ALL of this Nation will continue to be the disparity and supremacy of the FEW it has become, instead of the ALL it was supposed to be # .

Thinking in a �partisan way� is exactly what we want our justices to avoid, since issues should always be addressed independently on their own merits or deficiencies alone, as they affect the ALL that always is the American people.

Also, a life term of tenure makes it harder to avoid further bias in ways of thought. The bias and inflexibility of thought is harder to discourage, since the overall changes in the population and its cultural trends may change the interpretation of laws, out of synch with a court not representative of it. The court should, at all times, represent a cross section of the population. Thus short terms, and frequent changes, better represent that same ALL the population is.

A digression: The Constitutionality of the Party System

This brings to the fore another very important issue, which the American people should decide: is not the very existence of the party system itself a departure from the tenants of the American system � is it not itself unconstitutional? !! .

The packaging of issues under the letterhead of Parties, in the political system now available to the citizens of the United States is a violation of the inalienable rights bestowed on us in the charter document of the United States, The Declaration of Independence. It violates our freedom of belief, and the freedom of all citizens to decide issues free of ideological doctrine. Further, it violates the unbiasedness of the United States government to be tied to any particular ideology except the ideology to allow all citizens the guarantee of the unalienable rights mentioned above. Law controls behavior, the behavior of all citizens to live harmoniously together in a free society; it in no way sanctions or promotes beliefs of any kind, which would curtail the free will of any of its citizens * .

In adopting this party system, which has infiltrated our whole governmental system, we have denied the American citizens the right to decide issues independently of other matters, according to their own minds; and instead, given our rights and freedoms over to political parties and their paid lobbyists, who have, in turn, sold out our government to the highest bidders!

The results are the waste and corruption we have seen, which has bankrupted our government, and created a whole upper class of mega-millionaires and billionaires that now prosper at the expense of the American taxpayers. This is, in turn, an abridgement of everything our freedoms stand for, and an outright tyranny perpetrated against our people!

Shall we stand for this abridgement of everything our freedom stands for? Or, shall we act as our forefathers acted, to throw off this tyranny that is driving our country into ruin?

We have the warning of our founding father, George Washington, himself:

�I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state� Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.�

In the last twenty years we have seen those �baneful effects� vividly; those effects that parties and their platform ideologies have done to this nation:

The tremendous national debt!

The creation of national �enemies� in the interest of a dubious National Security, to further the growth of endless wars perpetrated by the purpose of profit incentive!

The continual demise of transparency in government; and the continual increase of a bureaucracy of �homeland defense�, which is becoming a new type of National Secret Police, spying on all of us!

And, just recently, the prolongation of Warrantless Surveillance of American Citizens!

The bailing out of private enterprises at the expense of the elderly, poor and disabled!

The continued enfranchisement of huge corporations, and the rise of bigger and bigger monopolies!

The outsourcing and off shoring of vital American jobs, and the continuance of government visas that deprive Americans, and even American veterans, of jobs, so that profiteers can benefit at the expense of the citizen!

The decisions of the Supreme Court that have established an Aristocracy of Wealth as the controller of government through the party system!

The destruction of the middle class, through the austerity and disparity they have been made to endure!

The existence of Unions, conceived in the representation of ALL, but, now, transformed into special interests groups of a FEW, who prosper at the expense of ALL!

The elimination of FREEDOM�S most vital condition: CHOICE, through the enthronement of a two party system that merely pretends to present us with ideological differences that really only hide the power and corruption of a SINGLE ruling group of MASTERS!

The distortion of true capitalism into a front for an extortionist system that has exchanged free enterprise for a system where supplies and even DEMANDS are created by monopolization, instead of society�s needs; the production of waste and duplication, instead of innovation; and the artificial control of prices and labor through monetary markets, the sale of company stocks, and the enthronement of speculation through the control of wealth!

But the most dire effect these MASTERS have created in this country, is the denial of the very spirit of what our freedom stands for: the DENIAL of that same TRUST we ourselves must express in each other, in order for this Nation to survive. Instead, IT HAS BEEN LOST IN THE DIVISION OF OUR PEOPLE into groups that care only for themselves, through the isolation and alienation of make-believe party ideologies.

So, what has AMERICA become?

Our government has abandoned us! What shall we do to ensure our safety, and the safety of our families?

The Declaration of Independence is clear:

�... that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government ... as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

So, have we merely come to another 1776?

Must we reclaim our freedoms from these MASTERS through force of arms?

NO! At least, not at this time!
But it is time we gave CHOICE back to our people, by eliminating the stupidity of parties!

End of digression

We have the recourse of law to redress all wrongs; it is up to us to reform the highest court of the land so it is free of ideology, and the FEW our ALL has come to represent.

So, Never again in the history of this Nation, will freedom be so flagrantly disregarded; NEVER, again, the rights of the MANY, so debased by the power of the FEW!

Today, in a United States, where disparity and Masters have become a commonplace, instead of an exception, it is important that the highest court of our land bring back to us the sentiment and spirit of the people who founded this land; a people that wanted true liberty and justice that mirrors the differences its free people represent in their diversity, yet always stands up for the rights and freedoms they all exercise mutually. That same unity from diversity our true motto ** of this country symbolizes in its standard of the ALL it will always be!

The appointment and tenure of the justices of the United States Supreme Court must be guided by merit alone, strictly excluded from any party bias whatsoever. The present appointment practice, through political favoritism, is a blot upon everything America stands for, and a travesty of the �liberty and justice for all� the Constitution of the United States of America stands for. Combined with the lifetime tenure of the justices, it is a public slap in the faces of the people of the United States, by a vicious bunch of megalomaniacs who look on the freedom of the American people with derision and scorn.

If we continue to make the highest court of the land a platform for parties, and the special interests they represent, instead of the representative and champion of the rights of the people of the United States as it was intended to be, the phrase �liberty and justice for all� will continue to be the hypocritical joke it now is, in a land where democracy has come to mean the tyranny of Masters over a population of slaves.

Our revolution must begin in the laws that govern our actions, not our minds; we must continue to reform our judiciary so that it once again supports ALL the people of the United States free of any ideology whatsoever!

If we remain silent, as Robert Louis Stevenson remarks above, then we continue to affirm the cruel lies perpetrated against us and our future generations; the lies that have deprived us of the freedom this Nation was founded to preserve for ALL!


To return to note's origin click the footnote number at left

& �Intention� is a bone of contention in any discussion of interpretation [see my essay: �Philosophical Musings � Interpretation and Meaning (What is truth?)�]. One can interpret a writing like the constitution as literally written, but, as in any document, the �intention� or purpose is a personal interpretation, since one cannot be in the mind of the writer at the time. And, the phrase �at the time� itself, is also very important. Times change, as do the people, a writing like the Constitution represents. For instance, at the time the constitution was written, slavery of the black race was considered legitimate. So what is the purpose of the Supreme court? To interpret the law according to the strict literal word (as in originalist's, or even textualism�s manner, so popular with conservative dogmatists), or to interpret the broad sweeping intent which changes with time, so that both changes in the people, and the unchangeable rights we call �human� are taken into consideration? I have spoken before of this (see the essay: �The Distinction Between The Majority And All�); that the majority, may not assume the ALL it was meant to be, and, in that case, the �justice� that the true �ALL� always seeks, may be lost. Therefore, the right course is the latter, which upholds that justice, that is the �ALL� of every true democracy.

! This is further reinforced, and confirmed, by the preamble to the Constitution: �We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States of America.�

Note: nowhere, in either of these documents is there mentioned any partisan ideology, except the formation of a more "perfect Union" (See the digression above).

# See the essay: �Divorcing Ideology From Democracy� in the �Solutions� Series of this web site.

!! We might, in fact, go even further here (like the John Birch Society's book of the fifties "Nine Men Against America" went), and declare the Supreme Court itself, as essentially functionally unconstitutional, because of the effect the party system has on its decisions, and even its makeup. Of course, this would require a constitutional amendment to bring to fruition. But the idea is not itself that outrageous as it would first seem to be, since fixing the present problems with the court, as to partisanship and makeup, for instance, will probably require the same, so why not just replace the whole thing, with something better!

* This would be a Public State doctrine, or dogma, as the political parties we now have are (a violation of the preamble's "in order to form a more perfect Union"); they are also a flagrant violation of free thought, another unalienable right.

** �E Pluribus Unum.�



Tai-Chi Tu
Tai-Chi Tu

Originally Published:

January 1, 2013


October 4, 2015