Law expert says appointing more Scalias on Supreme Court could put U.S. democracy at risk

The death of  U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has triggered a battle in Washington over the appointment of his successor by President Barack Obama.

President Barack Obama's nominee won't get a hearing or a vote from the Senate. According to Daily Herald, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said the Senate shouldn't confirm a replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia until there's a new president.

Republican presidential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz, said Obama won't get a Supreme Court justice confirmed to replace Scalia. Cruz said in stump speech Monday in Las Vegas that one of his first action as president would be to appoint a justice like Scalia to the Supreme Court, Mother Jones reports.

However, Justice Scalia's record on issues related to American democracy and elections was dismal. A professor of law and political science at University of California and Irvine School of Law, Richard Hasen, wrote on Reuters that appointing a justice like Scalia for his successor on the Supreme Court would likely put the U.S. participatory democracy at risk.

Hasen cited the 2010 Supreme Court ruling in "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission" that corporations, like individuals, have a First Amendment right to spend money independently in campaigns.

Scalia went further with the ruling, arguing that people have a First Amandment right to contribute unlimited sums directly to candidates. He would subject laws that limit campaign contributions, which means he would almost certainly fail in a constitutional challenge.

Hasen also mentioned the 2013 ruling in "Shelby v. Holder" case. The high court, including Scalia, decided that Congress no longer had the power so subject states with a record of intentional racial discrimination in voting to special federal oversight of their elections.

Scalia went further, saying that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act should not apply to "vote dilution" claims. The 1965 Voting Rights Act  provides protection to minorities to ensure they have a fair share in elections.

Scalia even remarked that the Voting Rights Act is simply the "perpetuation of racial entitlement".

Justice Scalia also argued on redistricting that courts should have no role in policing intentional drawing of district lines to give a political party an excessive amount of political power in a state.

Hasen mentioned only one election case in which Scalia took a democracy protecting position.  Scalia strongly supported the disclosure of those funding the U.S. elections. Scalia said that an anonymous campaign does not resemble the Home of the Brave.

Tags

U.S. Supreme Court, Justice Antonin Scalia, President Barack Obama, Senate, Ted Cruz, democracy

© 2023 Lawyer Herald All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.