Prestígio em baixa da Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos

A Suprema Corte americana, SCOTUS para os íntimos, anda em baixa. Nunca foi tão partidária quanto hoje. Leia três artigos que a criticam e por quê:

Brócolis e má-fé de Paul Krugman

Decisão sobre reforma da saúde pode ser novo golpe para a imagem da Suprema Corte norte-americana

Um juiz comparou a compra de um plano à de um brócolis, com a implicação de que, se o governo tiver o poder de obrigar os cidadãos a comprar o primeiro, teria direito de impor a compra do segundo. A relação horrorizou especialistas.

Por quê? Quando as pessoas optam por não comprar brócolis, não tornam o produto indisponível para aqueles que o desejam. Mas, quando as pessoas não fazem um plano a não ser que adoeçam -que é o que ocorre se a compra não for obrigatória-, o agravamento do pool de risco resultante dessa decisão torna os planos mais caros, e até inacessíveis, para as demais.  Mais

The Roberts Court Defines Itself - Editorial do NYT de hoje

For anyone who still thought legal conservatives are dedicated to judicial restraint, the oral arguments before the Supreme Court on the health care case should put that idea to rest. There has been no court less restrained in signaling its willingness to replace law made by Congress with law made by justices.

This should not be surprising. Republican administrations, spurred by conservative interest groups since the 1980s, handpicked each of the conservative justices to reshape or strike down law that fails to reflect conservative political ideology.

When Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy were selected by the Reagan administration, the goal was to choose judges who would be eager to undo liberal precedents. By the time John Roberts Jr. and Samuel Alito Jr. were selected in the second Bush administration, judicial “restraint” was no longer an aim among conservatives. They were chosen because their professional records showed that they would advance a political ideology that limits government and promotes market freedoms, with less regard to the general welfare.  Mais

Steven Pearlstein: Eat your broccoli, Justice Scalia

If the law is an ass, as Mr. Bumble declares in “Oliver Twist,” then constitutional law must surely be the entire wagon train.

Like most Washington policy wonks, I spent too much of last week reading transcripts of the Supreme Court arguments over the constitutionality of the new health reform law. This was to be a “teaching moment” for the country, an opportunity to see the best and the brightest engage in a reasoned debate on the limits of federal power. Instead, what we got too often was political posturing, Jesuitical hair-splitting and absurd hypotheticals.

Mais