Dividing The Divided Supreme Court In A Divided Country (October 3, 2016)
. . .
K “Divide the Court. The Court is already quasi-formally divided, yet they meet in joint session. The country is already divided. Formally divide the Court in two.”
J “So we simply acknowledge the divide in the country and divide the country and the Court in twain. That is where we are heading. That is our destiny.”
K “There is talk of dividing the Ninth Circuit which, if it is done, is always along geographic lines. The Supreme Court is divided along easily demarcated ideological lines and adequately defined geographic lines. The four Red Catholic Republican Institutionalist Boys should propound the law in the Red States. The four Blue ‘Jewish’ Democratic Individualist ‘Girls’ should propound the law in the Blue States.”
J “One Great Decision. Two utopias. I like it.”
K “What is truly promising is that neither side would be forced to undertake and endure a great constitutional convention; that prospect is terrifying. Each team could have a mimeographed copy of the same Constitution. And then each team could continue to reach opposite results.”
. . .
J “That would allow everyone in the two Americas to immanentize the Eschaton everywhere at the same time.”
K “Not exactly. One team would allow everyone in Blue America to immanentize the Eschaton and the other team would not allow anyone in Red America to immanentize the Eschaton.”
J “Exactly. Toward a more perfect division.”
. . .
[See the e-commentary for the last half dozen years in the Category “First Monday In October”, “Boycott Red America (January 3, 2005)”, “Immanentize The Eschaton: Move To Sunny Somalia (December 20, 2010)” and “Immanentize The Eschaton. Say What? (August 22, 2016).”]
Bumper stickers of the week:
The Election is all about the Court
We are selecting one of the two Courts not one of the two court jesters
With liberty and justice for some
e-commentary 
Leave a Reply