The Political Chase

The Real Legacy of George Bush

Arguably the issue Americans are concerned with today is the war in Iraq, and arguably conventional wisdom indicates Iraq — good or bad — will define George Bush’s legacy. Given recent Supreme Court rulings, I’m not so sure current conventional wisdom is accurate. A month or so ago, I would have challenged that statement. Twenty-five years from now, we may still be in Iraq, but certainly the conditions will have changed in some manner for the better. That is not to imply George Bush’s decision to invade Iraq made things better; it means somebody cleaned up his mess. But consider this. It’s safe to assume the decisions and outcomes related to Iraq will be determined and irreversible. In stark contrast to Iraq, the Supreme Court is a living, dynamic, organism. Some of the Justices will be rendering opinions 25 years from now. What impact will their decisions have on this country and society? Let’s hope recent decisions are not an omen.

Yesterday’s rulings literally stood the Court on its head. Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, not only erased the intent and basis of Brown v. Board of Education (1954), it slapped it in its face. I am still trying to grasp Chief Justice Roberts’ statement, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” If I even understand it, would that have worked in 1954, 1960, or 1970? Just let race discrimination take care of itself? Is he not basically saying, “OK, we trust you, be nice, do what is right - albeit not enforceable - and everything will be just fine.”

I may not have fully grasped Robert’s statement nor the logic associated with it yet, but I do know two things regarding racial discrimination. In many areas substantial progress has been made, but in some areas, it is worse today than it was 50 years ago. Discrimination is carried out differently, and is not limited to white people discriminating against people of color; it has reversed in some areas, although not necessarily the majority.

I make these allegations based on personal experience and observations. I have no scientific analysis to support them, but I do know what I see and experience. A brief example. The small rural town I grew up in was an excellent poster for discrimination. As a child, I saw crosses burned in front yards and churches burned to the ground. I basically left the town when I went to college, but moved back, temporarily, many years later. The first and most significant thing I realized about this town was how much worse discrimination had become. And, it was not limited to my hometown, the entire region (radius 100 miles) was the same.

If Chief Justice Roberts believes discrimination will regulate itself, he obviously doesn’t get out much.

While not as significant, relatively, as Parents v. Seattle, the Roberts ruling on Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. wiped out 96 years of precedence (Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D Park & Sons Co.) that eliminated price fixing as specified in the Sherman act.

I can’t remember whether it was Alito or Roberts, but in confirmation hearings one of them obviously flat out lied. When asked about precedent, with an unspoken reference to Roe v. Wade, the nominee’s response was strongly worded to imply adherence to and respect for precedence. No specific promises were made, but the committee could readily infer recognition of the importance of precedence. So much for that. The Justice must have taken a few lessons from Mitt Romney.

I wish I could remember which nominee it was — I want to say it was Alito, because I remember Roberts being much more evasive and relying on his resume to carry him through the confirmation process.

Yes, Iraq will be part of George Bush’s legacy, but his lasting influence over the Supreme Court may be worse. Anybody who follows TPC knows that is a robust statement for me to make.