Even a Blind Man Ought To See

Published in El Espectador
(Colombia) on 18 February 2015
by Marc Bassets (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Jessica Fernandez Rhodes. Edited by Laurence Bouvard.
It is hard to transform the U.S. without the consent of Congress and the approval of judges. The story of Democrat Barack Obama's presidency is the story of a tug of war with the judiciary. His initiatives have run into not only a legislative power under Republican control, but the tribunals capable of ruining them.

It happened with the health care reform, which extended coverage to millions of people without health insurance. Adopted by Congress in 2010, Obamacare faced a guerrilla war that ended up in the Supreme Court.

It is happening again with the president's unilateral actions to regularize millions of undocumented immigrants, suspended by a judge in Texas. The game, then and now, is played on three boards. It confronts Democrats with Republicans, federal government with the states and executive power with judiciary.

It is of no use to complain about conservative obstructionism: Obama's difficulties in implementing his reforms — and consolidate his legacy — are the price of polarization. Both health care and migratory reforms were adopted without the consent of the Republican Party, which represents half the country. The U.S. does not transform without Congress or the judges.

The founders wanted to prevent the president from governing on his own. From the end of racial segregation to George W. Bush's victory, through the legalization of abortion, the judiciary is the one that has truly shaped the country.

In 1937, in the midst of the clash with Supreme Court on the New Deal, future judge of the Supreme Court Felix Frankfurter wrote a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His words are valid for other tribunals and other eras. He said, “Even a blind man ought to see that the Court is in politics."


Es difícil transformar Estados Unidos sin el consenso del Congreso y sin la aprobación de los jueces. La historia de la presidencia del demócrata Barack Obama es la historia de los forcejeos con el poder judicial. Sus iniciativas han topado no sólo con un poder legislativo bajo el control republicano, sino con unos tribunales con la capacidad para arruinarlas.

Ocurrió con la reforma sanitaria, que amplió la cobertura a millones de personas sin seguro médico. Adoptada por el Congreso en 2010, Obamacare afrontó una guerra de guerrillas que desembocó en el Tribunal Supremo.

Ocurre de nuevo con las medidas unilaterales del presidente para regularizar a millones de sin papeles, suspendidas por un juez de Texas. La partida, entonces como ahora, se juega en tres tableros. Enfrenta a los demócratas con los republicanos, al Gobierno federal con los estados y al poder ejecutivo con el judicial.

No sirve lamentarse por el obstruccionismo conservador: las dificultades de Obama para aplicar sus reformas —y consolidar el legado— son el precio de la polarización. Tanto la reforma sanitaria como la migratoria se adoptaron sin el consenso del Partido Republicano, que representa a medio país. EE.UU. no se transforma sin el Congreso y tampoco sin los jueces.

Los fundadores querían evitar que el presidente gobernase solo. Desde el fin de la segregación racial a la victoria de George W. Bush, pasando por la legalización del aborto, el poder judicial es el que de verdad ha modelado el país.

En 1937, en pleno pulso con el Tribunal Supremo por el New Deal, el futuro juez del Supremo Felix Frankfurter escribió una carta al presidente Franklin D. Roosevelt. Sus palabras valen para otros tribunales y otras épocas. “Hasta un ciego —dijo— debería ver que el tribunal hace política”.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Austria: Gulf Diplomacy Looks To Prevent the Next Round of the Iran War after the US Midterms

Uganda: Trump, Netanyahu, Political Troubles and Why Uganda Should Be Watching Closely

India: Beyond the Blue Wave: American Voters Deliver the Reset the World Was Waiting for

Egypt: Trump Is Drowning in the Blue Flood

Taiwan: Blue Wave Engulfs Trump

Topics

Luxembourg: The Unpopular Populist: How Trump Mucked Up the Election for Republicans

   

Ireland: US Voters Have Rejected Data Centers and AI. What Happens Now?

Australia: The Spying Affair Scandal Surrounding Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang Could Shape the US-China AI Race

Australia: Donald Trump ‘Would Get Ratings Bump for Firing Pete Hegseth,’ Like on ‘The Apprentice’

Australia: Why Cost of Living Concerns Are Upending Global Politics

Ireland: Irish Examiner View: Time for US Democrats To Plan

Mexico: United States: The Offended Party’s Turn

Related Articles

Luxembourg: The Unpopular Populist: How Trump Mucked Up the Election for Republicans

Ireland: Irish Examiner View: Time for US Democrats To Plan

Mexico: United States: The Offended Party’s Turn

Japan: US Republican Party Defeat: A Heavy Anti-Trump Judgment