26dems Homepage
Tech Advisory: This web page is best viewed in Firefox, Safari, or Internet Explorer version 7 and newer. You may have to upgrade Adobe Flashplayer if you experience problems. Report any problem to the webmaster.

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Kyl Litmus Test on Supreme Court Nominees: It's Back to the (18)90s|Exposes sham "populism"

By Carl Pope Chairman of the Sierra Club
Huffington Post
April 16, 2010 05:08 PM


No, not the 1990s (Bill Clinton's era). I'm talking about the 1890s, when William McKinley served as the 19th century's last president. That's where the Senate Republican leadership wants to take the Supreme Court.

In one of the most politically bizarre moves of the year, Arizona senator and Republican Whip
Jon Kyl announced that his party will use the next Supreme Court nominee's position on the right of corporations to spend unlimited funds on supporting or opposing political candidates as a litmus test for that nomination.


Technically, Kyl claimed that he was merely warning President Obama against making the Supreme Court's 5 to 4 Citizens United v. FEC ruling in favor of corporate influence-buying a litmus test for choosing a nominee. But the press (and everyone else) understands by now that when the extreme right talks of an Obama litmus test, they are actually projecting their own plans. As a headline writer for The Hill put it: "Money Case Is New Test for Nominee."

Let's remember that even Justice Stephen Breyer, who was the most pro-business Democratic nominee to the Court nominee in 40 years, opposed the Citizens United decision. For that matter, former conservative Chief Justice William Rehnquist resolutely opposed efforts to give corporations political rights to his dying day. There is no plausible Obama nominee who would be likely to favor the decision. Therefore, no litmus test will be necessary -- for President Obama.

Continue reading here.