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

Poland: Why the America We Knew Is Gone*

Austria: There Is Still Some Check on the US Administration

Jordan: America between Israel’s Burdens and Arabs’ Benefits

Philippines: Trump Wants To Make Europe White Again

Pakistan: A Lone Gunman Sparks Trump’s War on Legal Immigrants

Topics

Saudi Arabia: Trump: Don’t Fence Me In

Philippines: Trump Wants To Make Europe White Again

Japan: National Guard Shooting in US Capital: Misguided Incitement of Anti-Foreign Doctrine

Spain: Cartoons in the Pentagon*

Egypt: America’s New Security Playbook: How Trump’s 2025 Strategy Redraws US Power and Purpose

Saudi Arabia: ‘Either Donald Trump or Benjamin Netanyahu’

Taiwan: The Slow Spread of Anti-American Sentiment Affecting Taiwan

Austria: There Is Still Some Check on the US Administration

Related Articles

Austria: There Is Still Some Check on the US Administration

India: Head-on | White Christian Nationalism Can Return America to Its Third World Roots

Spain: Congress Twists Trump’s Arm

Austria: The Agreement on the US Budget Is a Defeat for the Democrats

Germany: Politics in the Trump Era: Who Can Stand Up to the US President?