Washington Week: Student Voices (O)

COLUMN: Court is now in session
By Brett King
Kansas State Collegian (Kansas State U.)
10/05/2007

(U-WIRE) MANHATTAN, Kan. — As the winds begin to pick up and the leaves change colors, it is time once again for the U.S. Supreme Court to go back to work after their summer vacation. With fear in their hearts, ignorant liberals are screaming the "conservative court" is going to dismantle all their work and cause it to come crashing down like dead leaves falling from a tree. Yet the extreme left-wingers and the right-wing Bible thumpers need to realize not much is going to change.

For all their fears, the Supreme Court has yet to become a "conservative court." This current Supreme Court might produce many close 5-to-4 decisions during this term, but these results stem from having close to a balanced court.

According to a Sept. 19 Gallup Poll, 64 percent of U.S. citizens believe the Supreme Court is about right to too liberal. Apparently, neither the Gallup Poll-takers and folks over at the Daily Kos understand there is no such thing as conservative and liberal on the Supreme Court.

Yes, each member might follow a personal ideology, but the difference lies in the interpretation of the laws. Those scary "conservative" justices tend to follow a literal interpretation of the Constitution based on the meaning of the words written, and they also take into account the context in which the Amendments were written.

Liberal or moderate judges see the Constitution as a living document, subject to change and open to influence even from foreign laws.

At the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., Justice Antonin Scalia explained what a moderate judge was when he said, "What is a moderate interpretation of the text? Halfway between what it really means and what you'd like it to be. ... The moderate judge is the one who will devise the new Constitution that most people would approve of."

According to the American Bar Association, the Supreme Court will address many controversial issues this term, including the issues of requiring an ID when casting a ballot to prevent voter fraud, lethal injection procedures, suing third parties representing companies found guilty of securities fraud, habeas corpus, death penalty for child molesters, and possibly the Washington, D.C., handgun ban, which would establish a clear definition of the Second Amendment.

The current court is composed of four justices who follow a strict interpretation of the Constitution — Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. Another four follow the living document interpretation — Justices Stephan Breyer, John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

This leaves Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has sided with the living document interpretation many times, as the pivotal vote.

Contrary to what the Boston Globe might have printed in an article on Oct. 1, Kennedy does not have many conservative views. For years, he and former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor were like two peas in a pod swinging back and forth but generally following lock step with the moderate judges.

Justice Kennedy has sided with left-leaning judges in many controversial cases like Kelo v. City of New London, Lawrence v. Texas, Romer v. Evans and Roper v. Simmons. In the court opinion for Roper v. Simmons, Justice Kennedy wrote about laws in European countries and allowed these laws to dictate and circumvent our Constitution.

This term of the Supreme Court will not be the earth-shattering session people think it will be. Not much is going to change in the realm of precedence; Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1964 will remain intact, women still will have access to abortion, and we aren't bringing back "Old Sparky" as a form of execution.

Stop complaining and enjoy reading opinions from some of the most brilliant legal minds in the country.

[ Back to Student Voices ]