There seems to be a pattern with the current Supreme Court. It is widely known it is 5-4 Conservative, but the third branch of government was designed to be non-partisan and rule objectively on cases where the Constitution is in question. To balance out the obviously partisan big decisions, the lesser of two evils in minor cases is decided in favor of a liberal cause or idea. For instance, Yesterday,
the court limited some of the EPA’s regulating power when it comes to stationary sources of greenhouse gasses, but preserved its regulation authority in most cases.
This week, the last of June, is traditionally when the Supreme Court hands down some of its biggest, most controversial rulings. No progressive will forget the January, 2010 decision in favor of big money controlling elections with the Citizens United Verdict. Showing its “diversity,” in June, 2012, the Roberts Court shocked the Right by deciding the ACA was constitutional based on the Commerce Clause. In June, 2013, the Court ruled DOMA unconstitutional, enraging the Religious Right once again. But this was followed by invalidating the parts of the Voting Rights Act which mandated federal supervision of elections in states who were once part of the Confederacy. In April, 2014, SCOTUS once again dealt a blow to democracy by allowing virtually unlimited campaign donations to candidates or causes with the McCutcheon v Federal Election Commission decision.
By deciding in favor of the EPA’s power to control unfettered pollution, SCOTUS sided with “liberal ideals” of keeping our air semi-breathable. But on the horizon are two potentially disastrous decisions for President Obama.
Neither appear too propitious. The first, Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores & Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp v. Sebelius will decide if under the ACA,
private businesses have the right to exercise their freedom of religion either under the Constitution or the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and if so, whether the contraceptive mandate violates that religious freedom.
The next case National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning pertains to Presidential Appointments: This pending verdict may be…
…a decision against President Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
If history is any indicator, it seems these next two decisions will be ruled in favor of conservatives. By padding their right wing leanings with some scant victories for liberals, they try to mask the pro-fascist attitudes of the majority of the highest court in the land.