Thursday, January 28, 2010

A Supreme Noogie

Joe Wilson behaved himself last night. Sam Alito did not. Not to excuse Mr. Wilson’s behavior last year, but he was at least in his own chamber (which, come to think of it, makes his behavior even more ghastly - he disses his guests), and Joe is a member of the "loyal (to what) opposition." He was a partisan, responding in a partisan manner.

But even though he used his Library of Congress voice, Sam Alito’s mouthed outburst of "not true" to the President, in response to the President’s criticism of a recent SCOTUS decision, strikes me as an even greater breach of civility. The Supreme Court is supposed to be non-partisan. While it’s obvious that the Justices, being human (we are told), have political leanings. But in their behavior while acting as a member of the Court (and sitting in the front row at a Presidential Address with television cameras on them would count), they are supposed to be above the partisan fray. Last night, however, Alito behaved as though he was a kid back in New Jersey, exchanging volleys of "Uh hu" and "Nah ah" with his sister. I expect better behavior from a full-grown Supreme. In fact, most of the time at a State of the Union address, the Justices sit on their hands, to avoid an appearance of partisanship. And while they might smile or frown, I am pretty certain no Justice has ever face-mimed "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire" in a joint session of Congress.

Maybe Alito’s response to the President was based on a heart-felt belief that the Citizens United decision was so obviously The True Law of The Land, that any disagreement with it is unbearable, and requires immediate correction. But even that benefit of the doubt does not hold up. If Alito truly felt so strongly and passionately about any difference of opinion, then when is his own "home territory," Justice Alito at least should have been shaking his head the whole time Justice Stevens read his fiery dissenting opinion from the bench. Maybe stuck out his tongue. As far as I know, he did not do either. If he had, I’m sure Nina Totenberg would have mentioned it.

So I take Alito’s behavior as nothing less than another signal that the Supreme Court is not only activist and partisan, it is now jack-bootedly so. The conservative Justices do not truck outside dissent, to the point that at least one of them will behave like a kid playing basketball in Aunt Tilly’s living room: so focused on their own view of the world, that they lack any courtesy whatsoever when invited to someone else’s house. At Aunt Tilly’s house, that’s just bad manners. On the world stage, that’s usually played out as totalitarianism.

During the State of the Union, at least one member of one of the Cabinet is selected to sit it out. In the event that some disaster wipes out the U.S. Capitol Building, and all inside, we would have at least one "designated survivor" who can take the reigns. The Congress usually picks a few members to sit it out, as well. The Supreme Court does not traditionally do this. They are usually all there, and seated in the front row, as honored guests. But maybe it’s time that they leave Sammy home for the next one.

Then again.... If a disaster did occur, the surviving Judicial Branch would be made up entirely of: Sam Alito. So strike that last thought. Next time, Sammy, try to behave more like a Supreme Court Justice, and less like a pesky kid who cannot let a dissenting comment pass without responding with the Washington DC equivalent of a school-yard noogie.