Jerry Summers
In light of the controversy over recent decisions by the United States Supreme Court in the areas of abortion and presidential immunity, one has to search the history of the nation's judiciary to subjectively select what may be the worst infringement on individual rights ever decided by the third branch of government
In 1847, the complicated 11 year legal journey that approved the inhumane practice of slavery began that resulted in the March 6, 1857 Scott vs Sanford opinion by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney in a 7-1 opinion that upheld slavery in US territories and denied the legality of black citizenship in America and declared the Missouri Compromise that allowed both slave and abolitionist states to become part of the union to be unconstitutional. The decision amongst other factors would lead to the bloody Civil War (1861-1865) and spark divisions in the black and white races that continue to this day.
Self appointed advocates often inflame emotions that hurt America's image locally and abroad. Although denied by many authorities, Russian ruler Nikita Khrushchev in the 1960s is alleged to have stated that “We can never defeat America militarily but it will destroy itself from within.” The statement may be a boding prophecy, irrespective of whether Khrushchev said it or not.
The Dred Scott decision would exacerbate sectional tensions between North and South.
Many legal authorities contend that with its overall consequences it is the worst decision ever rendered by our nation's highest court.
In 2010, the US Supreme Court decided Citizen United vs Federal Election Commission issued another landmark decision regarding campaign finance laws and the First Amendment Freedom of Speech clause that prohibits the government from restricting many independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, nonprofit organizations, labor unions and other associations.
The 5-4 decision has opened the financial coffers of the above and others under a variety of techniques has created the use of political terms such as Super PACs, 501(c)(4) incorporated public advocacy groups, dark money etc. It has substantially increased the cost of campaigns, and basically removed donation limits on millionaire/billionaire contributors.
Some critics of the decision contend that its effect leads to an increase in Republican influence and representation in both state legislatures and Congress. However, it appears both political parties are equally adept/inept in panic spending that the majority of Americans believe could be spent on other needs and issues.
(Whether we as a nation can survive either or both decisions is beyond the scope of this article. Curtailing the power of the nine member United States Supreme Court under the separation of powers clause and our Constitution in 2024 is not an original idea! It was probably last seriously considered under FDR with his “court packing” plan but other controversial decisions often resurrect the idea. The “Impeach Justice Earl Warren” campaign after the overturning of the Dred Scott decision also was volatile in the Brown v. Board of Education case in the 1950s.)
----
If you have additional information about one of Mr. Summers' articles or have suggestions or ideas about a future Chattanooga area historical piece, please contact him at jsummers@summersfirm.com)