Thursday, January 28, 2010

Working the Refs

The blogs are abuzz this morning with video of Justice Samuel Alito mouthing "not true" after Obama's swipe at the Supreme Court over the recent Citizens United decision that overturned decades of campaign finance law.

Obama's speech:

It’s time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office. With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections.

I don’t think that American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse by foreign enemies; they should be decided by the American people. And I’d urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps correct … some of these problems.


Alito's reaction:



Some people feel that it's completely improper for Obama, as a member of a co-equal branch of government, to criticize the Court (to their faces) in a major speech. Others think that it's equally improper for Alito to be "talking back." Still others generally bemoan the further politicization of the court.

I'm pretty much fine with how this went down. Anyone who's followed the Supreme Court since 2000 or so knows that the Court is already heavily politicized, and the public (rightly, in my opinion) views it thus. Even if the Court is a completely neutral arbiter, Obama's just working the refs, the same way that Boeheim or Belichick or any other coach (representing a particular team) will jaw at the referees in a game if he or she thinks that they've made a bad call.

Part of being a ref is having to be able to take a little of that and then go on and do your job fairly for the rest of the season. I don't mind if Alito complains under his breath - I'm sure most of the zebras do that to, they just don't have the cameras on them at the time. What i will care about is if Alito or anyone else on the court uses this as an excuse to rule less than fairly on an issue important to Obama in the future.

No comments: