Supreme Court, Elections and Crisis of U.S. Democracy -
Voice of Revolution - 
October 15, 2020.
Protest in Washington DC against confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to
the Supreme Court. (C. King)
As
the disputed U.S. presidential election continues to unfold, the
likelihood of the Supreme Court intervening is coming to the fore. At
present at least one of the Pennsylvania lawsuits -- an appeal by the
state Republican Party and now joined by the Trump campaign -- is
likely to make it to the Supreme Court. It involves discounting votes
received after Election Day. Trump may hope to still win in
Pennsylvania, and with a favourable ruling, also win in Wisconsin and
Michigan, which extended the vote in a manner similar to Pennsylvania.
Whether or not a ruling determines the outcome of the vote, it is
likely that the push for the lawsuit is part of the effort of the
international financial oligarchy to eliminate any blocks to its
seizure of a centralized decision-making power and this includes
undermining state authority in elections, including that of the state
Supreme Courts. Initially Pennsylvania's Democratic
Party and the state's Secretary of State sued to have the date for
accepting mail-in ballots extended three days, from 5:00 pm November 3
to 5:00 pm November 6. These ballots are the main ones still being
counted. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in support of the
extension. Republicans appealed and asked the U.S. Supreme Court for an
expedited ruling before the elections, which the Court denied. However,
it left open the possibility of pursuing the case. Justice Alito wrote
that the ruling "does not mean, however, that the state court decision
must escape our review." The extended deadline "has national
importance, and there is a strong likelihood" that the ruling violates
the U.S. Constitution, he added. While Pennsylvania
is currently the only state where Trump is pursuing this case, a number
of other states also extended their deadlines, including those with
close vote counts: Michigan, where ballots postmarked by November 3
could be received up to two weeks after Election Day; North Carolina,
where they could be received within nine days after the election; and
Wisconsin, within six days after November 3. These states are also
possible arenas for similar lawsuits by Trump whose claim is the one he
uttered in a White House speech: "If you count the legal votes, I
easily win." And "If you count the illegal votes, they can try to steal
the election from us." What emerges in all of this
is that the Supreme Court, not the state-level Supreme Courts and
legislatures -- is being put forward as the arbiter and decision-maker
of what is and is not legal for elections. Even if a ruling by the
Supreme Court does not decide the election itself, it provides a
precedent for overruling state Supreme Courts. In doing so it increases
the power of the executive office of the presidency to decide election
law. This removes it from the power of the states or, at the very
least, lessens the state power. This tells us something about the
general tendency in the restructuring of the U.S. state machinery. More
and more power is being concentrated in the Office of the
President for purposes of eliminating structures that stand in the way
of the narrow private interests which have usurped the decision-making
power. Authorities at the federal and state levels are contending for
everything -- evident in the many conflicts concerning policing,
immigration, COVID-19 and elections. The restructuring aims at federal
control all down the line. The complexity for the
rulers is that intervention by the Supreme Court in these matters is
already being questioned. The consciousness among the people is such
that unions and dozens of organizations are standing at the ready to
reject the Supreme Court playing a deciding role. More generally the
legitimacy of the Court is increasingly in doubt. With the rapid
confirmation of Trump's latest addition to the bench, Amy Coney
Barrett, the Court is seen as stacked in Trump's favour. In
2010, the Supreme Court also made the notorious Citizens United ruling
that opened the doors for massive funding of elections by the
monopolies and oligarchs, using superPACs (Political Action Committees)
to provide unlimited funding. From 2010 to 2018, superPACs provided
about $2.9 billion for federal elections, the bulk coming from just a
few individual donors. In the 2018 elections, for example, the top 100
donors to superPACs contributed nearly 78 per cent of all superPAC
funding. The ruling increased the undemocratic and corrupt character of
U.S. elections. It also facilitated the ability of the oligarchs to
more readily usurp the power of the U.S. state for their own private
narrow interests. The Supreme Court functions
mainly as an arm of the executive, with Supreme Court rulings generally
favouring whatever is needed by the executive at any point in time.
This is evident in rulings related to slavery, desegregation and
elections. With the rivalries among the factions of
the ruling class more intense than ever and their institutions
dysfunctional, as these elections reveal them to be, some rulings may
reflect the contention between the vying factions within the Executive
itself. At the same time, there has been a general weakening of the
role of the Court, just as there has been with Congress. Rulings are
simply ignored, as Obama did concerning the Guantánamo
torture camp and as Trump has largely done concerning immigration,
refugees and Muslim bans. For the 2020 elections,
use of the Supreme Court in deciding the election is fraught with
danger for the rulers. The anger with government failures over COVID-19
and the broad and unrelenting movement of the people is such that the
federal government and its policing agencies are losing the authority
to govern and use force against the people. The conditions are calling
out for a new arrangement of governance, one which empowers the people
to govern and decide. Any Supreme Court interference in the election
will only re-emphasize that the existing arrangements are not
accountable to the people.
This article was published in
Volume 50 Number 43 - November 7, 2020
Article Link:
Supreme Court, Elections and Crisis of U.S. Democracy -
Voice of Revolution
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|
