The Movements of Roberts Court and American Democracy (Essay Sample)

The Roberts Court and American Democracy Back to list
The Roberts Court are also the United States Supreme Court since the year 2005. The court is led by the Chief Justice of the United State John G. Roberts. Compared to the preceding court, the Rehnquist Court, the Robert’s Court is more conservative. This is because, the Court confirmed Justice Samuel Alito who is more conservative to replace the retired Justice Sandra D. O’Connor who was a moderate judge. Since the confirmation of Justice Samuel Alito, the Court has been able to make major rulings on affirmative action, gun control, abortion, criminal sentencing, capital punishment, and campaign finance regulation (Clayton & McMillan, 137). However, even though the Court has been doing so much in the fight for democracy, many citizens feel that the Court has failed in many of its rulings. These people have ended up being against the court and posing challenges to its major activities. This paper will focus on the major activities of the court on the fight for democracy in this era of corrupt and money driven politics, the effect of money and wealth in America’s politics, the rights of speech to the poor, and the probable recommendation to improve the effectiveness and the efficiency of the court in the fight for American’s democracy.
Over the last decades several reformers for example Teddy Roosevelt have lamented of the several wealthy individuals and corporations who have been corrupting the politics of America through their wealth (Dahl, 287). Louis Brandeis a Supreme Court judge ones said that it is very hard for America to have democracy while its people have wealth in their pockets. He added that, democracy cannot go hand in hand with wealth but rather its either people have wealth or democracy but not both of them (Coyle, 17). The government is therefore supposed to come up with strategies to fight the undue wealth influence in State’s politics and democracy. Some of these includes progressive taxation and legislation of anti-trust laws. After the abuse of Richard N. Watergate more reforms were proposed to curb the political wealth abuse. These reforms included political contributions, elections financing, expenditure limits, and disclosure laws. The politicians also use their values and finances to influence election of Justices who will help them expand their political effects in America by supporting them in constitutional and courts activities (Clayton & McMillan, 133).
The introduction of the Roberts Court continued to work on limiting the political money power in America. This was an effort to boost the decision of the Supreme Court in 1976 to limit the amount of money political candidates should have, or wealth persons and groups should spend during a political period. McCutcheon and Citizens United are great recent examples of how the Roberts Court is allowing privilege and money entrench itself, these movements have been preventing the functioning of the political system. From the movements several other movements have emerged which include rising inequalities in the United State and gridlock in Congress. Because of this it is imperative to make sure that money should not hold any position in the political power through its usage to influence outcomes. It is not supposed to be a determining factor in the political arena in terms of passing the political bills, running of elections, and political powers. The First Amendment should therefore shield these political privileges from the rich and give the poor and powerless people in the society to comfortably vie for any post (Clayton & McMillan, 139)
Roberts Court activities have been thought by many citizens in America to suppress the peoples’ speech instead of enhancing them. For instance, the Roberts Court’s First Amendment has been seen as a tool to suppress the speech of the poor and the powerless people in America. During its amendment it was supposed to be a right for all not for few who do not have powers in the society. This is because every person in the society has a right to speak in any of the social situation. There are rules in America that govern communication and give citizens rights to speak. However, there are no rules that subject us to unlimited rights of speaking and shouting but the free speech clause of First Amendment is very hard to understand. The rights and freedom of speech are suppressing the rights of the poor and strengthening the powers of the wealthy persons in the society. In regards to this, the rights and freedom to speech have to be readable in a simple social context of liberty for everyone in the society. However, several movements like the McCutcheon, the Citizens United, and the defenders of these movements do not want to understand and to interpret these principles effectively (Clayton & McMillan, 139).
American elections should not be wealth driven. Many scholars and judges have for long being against the way the American elections have been driven by money. Martin Luther King once supported the demonstration of four students from North Carolina who were demonstrating for a number of weeks against the squaring of the constitution among the poor and the wealth. Judge Michaels from the Fourth Circuit gave an example of a threatening farmer’s advisement to show the way the political leaders were doing to support their parties. He l