Pethokoukis

Obama flashback: ‘Theoretically’ OK for Supreme Court to redistribute wealth

Back in 2001, Barack Obama gave this stunning interview to a Chicago public radio station in which he talked about using the Supreme Court, the most undemocratic of the three branches of government, to “spread the wealth.”

A rough excerpt:

If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples so that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order, and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be OK. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and the more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extentas radical as, I think, people try to characterize the Warren court, it wasn’t that radicalit didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers and the Constitution…. One of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think, there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways, we still suffer from that. You can craft theoretical justification for it legally, and any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts.

 

2 thoughts on “Obama flashback: ‘Theoretically’ OK for Supreme Court to redistribute wealth

  1. Glenn Beck ran this tape many times on his FOX News TV show, the essential parts like the blather about “negative rights” – the actual content of the Constitution. Obama is obviously a radical leftist who wants the supreme court to fabricate new “rights” – meaning free goods and services – out of thin air. That’s pretty ghastly for a supposed professor of constitutional law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>