Why Obama and Romney won’t touch the Supreme Court in Campaign 2012

A president’s most significant power is the real third rail of politics

Jeff Greenfield is a Yahoo! News columnist and the host of “Need to Know” on PBS. A five-time Emmy winner, he has spent more than 30 years on network television, including time as the senior political correspondent for CBS News, the senior analyst for CNN, and the political and media analyst for ABC News. His most recent book is “Then Everything Changed: Stunning Alternate Histories of American Politics.”

Last week brought another lesson that the most significant of all presidential powers--the making of war not excepted--is the power to nominate justices to the Supreme Court. A chief executive’s most ambitious domestic policies may be ignored or reversed by future presidents and Congresses; a new administration can end a war. By contrast, three justices appointed more than 20 years ago cast votes last week that would have struck down the current president’s key domestic achievement. Barring illness or injury to one of these justices, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush will be powerfully influencing public policy for at least another decade.

And this fall will likely bring a different kind of lesson: If history is any guide, this most powerful of presidential prerogatives will be one of the least significant issues in deciding the presidential race.

[Related: How the court took its fight to the media]

Supreme Court decisions can certainly roil the political waters. Franklin Roosevelt and his supporters were infuriated during his first term by a string of Court decisions--many by 5-4 or 6-3 votes--that eviscerated the power of Washington and state governments to regulate economic activity. When the Warren Court outlawed school segregation in 1954, a generation of Southern politicians made “massive resistance” a key to their electoral fortunes; and the Warren Court’s rulings for criminal defendants helped fuel a political “law and order” backlash.

But, surprising as it may seem, these controversial decisions never turned the Supreme Court itself into a major election issue.

Angry as FDR was at the Supreme Court’s decisions, he got a lesson in the public’s respect for the institution when he said at a 1935 press conference that “we have been relegated to a horse and buggy definition of interstate commerce.” The press reaction so sharp that, as New Deal historian William Leuchtenberg wrote, “The president never mentioned the court during his re-election.” It was only after Roosevelt’s landslide victory in 1936 that he unveiled his plan to “pack” the Supreme Court with as many as six additional justices. (The plan died in a hail of bipartisan Congressional opposition, but later appointments and a change of mind by another Justice Roberts turned the Court into a New Deal ally).

In 1968, rapidly rising crime rates, along with an outbreak of violence in inner cities and on college campuses, made “law and order” a significant theme in the campaigns of Richard Nixon and third-party candidate George Wallace. But Nixon’s comments on the Supreme Court itself were muted. In his acceptance speech, he said, “Let us always respect, as I do, our courts and those who serve on them, but let us also recognize that some of our courts in their decisions have gone too far in weakening the peace force as opposed to the criminal forces in this country.” Nixon’s big applause line came when he pledged “we’re going to have a new Attorney General of the United States!”--suggesting that Ramsey Clark was a more tempting target than Earl Warren.



You have go back a century, to the 1912 Presidential campaign, to find an election where the Supreme Court was at the center of the debate. For years, progressive governors like California’s Hiram Johnson and Wisconsin’s Robert LaFollette had championed the ballot initiative and the recall of elected officials. Now, with federal courts invalidating state laws aimed at regulating wages and hours, the Progressive Party demanded “such restriction of the power of the courts as shall leave to the people the ultimate authority to determine fundamental questions of social welfare and public policy.” And the Progressive Party candidate, former President Theodore Roosevelt, backed the idea not only of recalling judges, but of “recalling” specific court decisions under some circumstances. To President (and future Chief Justice) William Howard Taft, this notion was “radically erroneous and destructive ... a form of muckraking of the courts.” The federal bench, he argued, was a bulwark of protection against the radical, socialistic tendencies at work in the states.

Not incidentally, the winner of the 1912 election, New Jersey Gov. Woodrow Wilson, avoided the issue of judicial recall, focusing instead on the substance of social legislation. Wilson may have recognized, as FDR and Nixon did after him, that a frontal assault on the Supreme Court raises the specter of a president who would seek to tip the balance of power among the three branches of government. A recent and relatively temperate dose of presidential criticism--Obama’s slap at the “Citizens United” decision during his 2010 State of the Union address--received a wary response from the news media.

It is, of course, possible--maybe even probable-- that a Supreme Court decision striking down the Affordable Care Act would have written a new chapter in this history. Coming little more than four months before an election, a major decision sharply split along explicitly partisan lines would have put the case squarely into the political arena. With polls showing more Americans regarding the Court as politically motivated in its judgment, that would be the last thing anyone with a protective instinct for the Court would have wanted: someone, say, like a Chief Justice of the United States, whose vote could save the Court from that fate.

  • Want your skin to look 20 to 30 years younger? Try this
    Want your skin to look 20 to 30 years younger? Try this

    This can reduce the effects of aging on the skin with just three months of treatment, making it appear 20-30 years younger, and won’t cost you a dime.

  • Massive great white shark is largest ever tagged off Australian coast
    Massive great white shark is largest ever tagged off Australian coast

    This photo has been circulating over the past couple of weeks, ever since it was snapped off the coast of southwest Australia, and with good reason ... the great white shark in the photo is huge, over 5 metres long, … Continue reading →

  • Convicted robber was never told to report to prison, lived productive life for 13 years
    Convicted robber was never told to report to prison, lived productive life for 13 years

    ST. LOUIS - After he was convicted of armed robbery in 2000, Cornealious Anderson was sentenced to 13 years behind bars and told to await instructions on when and where to report to prison. But those instructions never came.

  • Train selfie takes a turn when guy gets kicked in head by conductor
    Train selfie takes a turn when guy gets kicked in head by conductor

    Okay, I think it’s safe to say the selfie situation has gotten out of control. If you’re trying to take a sweet pic of yourself on train tracks, close enough to an oncoming train that the conductor can literally kick … Continue reading →

  • Putin fields question from U.S. fugitive Snowden
    Putin fields question from U.S. fugitive Snowden

    By Steve Gutterman and Alessandra Prentice MOSCOW (Reuters) - Edward Snowden, the fugitive former U.S. spy agency contractor who leaked details of U.S. intelligence eavesdropping, asked Russian President Vladimir Putin a question on Thursday during a televised call-in show. The exchange was the first known direct contact between Putin and Snowden since Russia granted the American asylum last summer after he disclosed widespread monitoring of telephone and internet data by the United States and fled the country. Snowden, who has been given refuge in Russia, was not in the studio where Putin was speaking. Snowden, wearing a jacket and open-collar shirt and speaking before a dark background, asked Putin: "Does Russia intercept, store or analyze, in any way, the communications of millions of individuals?" He also asked whether Putin believes improving the effectiveness of investigations justifies "placing societies .. under surveillance".

  • RCMP lay charges against Dutch man in case of dead B.C. teen Amanda Todd
    RCMP lay charges against Dutch man in case of dead B.C. teen Amanda Todd

    VANCOUVER - Five charges including child pornography, extortion, criminal harassment and Internet luring have been laid by RCMP against a man in the Netherlands in connection with the Amanda Todd case, an online bullying story that captured the attention of millions across the world. The 15-year-old British Columbia girl killed herself in October 2012, shortly after detailing in an Internet video her story of unrelenting harassment by an Internet predator. Amanda's mother, Carol Todd, was at the news conference where police made the announcement about charges. The announcement on charges Thursday came just hours after a Dutch television station revealed a 35-year-old man jailed in the Netherlands since January was accused of using webcam footage to blackmail dozens of victims, including Todd, in several countries.

  • Captain of capsized ferry, 2 crew members arrested in South Korea disaster
    Captain of capsized ferry, 2 crew members arrested in South Korea disaster

    SEOUL, South Korea - A prosecutor says the captain of the South Korean ferry that sank two days ago has been arrested. Senior prosecutor Yang Jung-jin says 68-year-old Lee Joon-seok and the crew members were detained early Saturday.

  • Heat playoff run could decide James' future in Miami

    The Miami Heat may not be entering the playoffs as the top seed but they are still very much the team to beat, and anything less than a third consecutive NBA title could lead to the breakup of their Big Three. No club has won three straight titles since the Los Angeles Lakers in the early 2000s, and the 16-team field for this year's playoffs, which begin on Saturday, has no shortage of contenders for the NBA's Larry O'Brien Championship Trophy. The San Antonio Spurs, who were a whisker away from winning last year's NBA Finals, and the Indiana Pacers, eager to avenge last season's loss to Miami in the Eastern conference finals, are just two of the many teams feeling good about their chances. LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh joined forces in 2010 with the goal of creating a dynasty in Miami by stockpiling NBA titles but enter the postseason facing questions about team chemistry and depth.

Follow Yahoo! News

Loading...