Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

What would O'Connor say to the Supreme Court?

“Gosh, I step away for a couple of years and there’s no telling what's going to happen,” former justice Sandra Day O'Connor exclaimed at a Georgetown symposium on campaign finance and judicial elections on Tuesday. She went on to predict that “mutally assured destruction” was likely if corporations and unions “unleash their campaign spending monies without restrictions.”

Retired Justice O'Connor
Former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor, as she delivered her remarks at Georgetown University Law Center on Tuesday, Jan. 26, 2010. (Reuters/Kevin Lamarque)

Her remarks weren't exactly pablum, but I couldn’t help but wonder: What would Justice O’Connor have said were she less gracious and diplomatic and speaking directly to her former colleagues about their decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Here’s how I think the chat would have gone (cue dreamscape music):

I knew I shouldn’t have retired! I leave you Ivory Tower-types alone for two seconds and you make a mess of things. You willy-nilly ditch perfectly good decisions – one of mine, no less. I worked myself to the bone finding common ground on that thing, striking just the right balance between respecting the rights of all – including those “people” you five call corporations – and keeping mountains of corrupting corporate cash from overshadowing the voice of other people. What, Sam? Which other people? Some of us call them voters.
And did I not say over and over and over again -- Nino, stop rolling your eyes! -- that, unless they’re certifiably loony, the wishes of lawmakers deserve deference? Did I not tell you that this matters -- and not just because I was the only one of the us who’d ever stood for office? No, it doesn’t make me any better than you, Tony, but it does mean that I may know a little more -- I take that back -- a lot more about how money really works in the world of politics.

By Eva Rodriguez  | January 27, 2010; 3:25 PM ET
Categories:  Rodriguez  | Tags:  Eva Rodriguez  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: They don’t make them like Mathias anymore
Next: Nancy Pelosi's health-care strategy


What she did say was "This is the end of Democracy"

Posted by: JRM2 | January 27, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

The religious right seized on Martin Scorsese’s Film The Last Temptation of Christ as a way to rehabilitate its image and to mobilize ordinary citizens to attack liberalism in art and culture, in the late 1980’s and beyond. Does the recent Supreme Court decision on campaign financing provide common-interest minded progressive with a similar opportunity to connect-the-dots between the widening “rich versus everyone else" income gap (over the last 40 years) and the unbridled 3,000+ % increase in campaign expenditures, over the same period?

Posted by: DotsConnectors | January 29, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company