kevinhiggins.org

The Supreme Court's Reverse Robinhoods

The following headline, in today's Wall Street Journal Op-Ed Pages, caught my eye, because the recent Supreme Court decision expanding the use of Eminent Domain REALLY disturbed me. The headline was:

The Supreme Court's Reverse Robinhoods

You should read the article if this kind of trend alarms you, and I think it should.

But let me sum my reaction up for you, in case you WERE alarmed, and did like I did, which was assume this was a decision made primarily by the CONSERVATIVES on the bench, acting (unwisely, in my opinion) in the interests of big business over the little guy.

My summed up reaction: "Holy Shit!"

Because that's the way liberals would like us to picture conservatives, right? As the tramplers of freedoms and the advocates of the benefits of big business over government? And that the liberals are the protectors of the little guy? The champions of individual freedoms and protections?

Au contraire--at least on the Supreme Court, it seems.

Discovering that this dangerous, unfortunate decision was driven by the 4 liberal judges floored me.

Someone needs to ask, and discover: How the HELL did this happen and why did those four liberal judges so completely abandon the rights of the individuals that they typically champion? Like any criminal investigator, someone better ask, "Who benefits?" And then note that the prime beneficiary, Pfizer, certainly has no lack of resources to throw at decisions such as this. I expect that following the money-trail will, as it so often sadly does, uncover degrees of influence that I think many Americans used to feel our Supreme Court was immune to.

In the immortal words of Inspector Clouseau: "Not any more."

Posted by khiggins at June 24, 2005 08:37 AM | TrackBack