The U.S. Supreme Court will issue three election law opinions between May 18 and June 29. They are: (1) Caperton v Massey Coal Company, 08-22, on what to do when a state elects its state court judges and one side in a lawsuit has made huge campaign contributions to sitting judges; (2) Citizens United v FEC, 08-205, on whether people who make and advertise a movie which conveys a message about a federal candidate must follow federal campaign laws; (3) Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v Holder, 08-322, on whether section 5 of the federal Voting Rights (requiring certain states and their political subdivisions to get advance approval from the federal government before changing any election laws) is constitutional.
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to put out opinions on these seven dates: May 18, May 26, June 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29. All are Mondays except that May 26 is a Tuesday.
The oliticization of the Courts is not only apparent, itis an affront to parties to actions in which pooitic shold have n bearings. But judges and justices see not the errors of their ways and persist to put politivcs above the law as written. The the law is only the law when it is enforced as written – not interpreted with the personal poppiticl leanings of judges or justrices.l
There are no external considerations to the written lsw, for if tere were, they wojld have been been incorporated into the written law – as were the Bill of Rights when incorporated into the Constitution of the United States as the first tn Amendment.
No person shold be appointe to a federal judgeship, or the the United States Supreme Court who has even a minimalk involvement with a political party. It is best they be taken from academia – especially those without law degrees. Perhaps those with degrees in the Englsih language wold be better qualified to interpret the meaning of the language of a lw, than someone who has had a political bent for a number of years.