A Politics Supreme

“He lit a lamp in broad daylight and said, as he went about, ‘I am looking for a human.’”
Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers by Diogenes Laërtius as translated by Robert Drew Hicks

With this being the first post of The Lamp & Sun, and considering we seek to expose dark money and hypocrisy in politics, let’s begin with a story about Louis D. Brandeis.

Brandeis was incorruptible.

For a lawyer, U.S. Supreme Court Justice or not, that’s nothing short of encomium. But Brandeis was special. He was a graduate of Harvard Law School, obtaining the highest grades in school history. He was a ferocious critic of the consolidation of economic and political power. Brandeis was truly the people’s lawyer.

In 1916, President Woodrow Wilson nominated Brandeis for an Associate Justice position on the U.S. Supreme Court. While Brandeis’ brilliance and moral character were beyond question, he faced staunch opposition because he stood against oligarchs like J. P. Morgan, who made fortunes with other people’s money. He despised big business and government overreach. In brief, Brandeis had a lot of powerful enemies. He was at once, “the most liked and the most hated man at the Bar in America.”

“We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”
Louis D. Brandeis

The U.S. Senate didn’t hold a public confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court nominee until 1916. This changed with Wilson’s controversial nomination of Brandeis.

Many weighed in on the nomination; for and against. A Special to The New York Times on February 12th, 1916 published a petition proclaiming “BRANDEIS IS UNFIT” submitted by Dr. A. Lawrence Lowell, President of Harvard University, and fifty-four well heeled citizens of Boston who opposed the nomination. The petition, attacking the judicial fitness of Brandeis, was read aloud to the Senate by none other than Thomas R. Marshall, the U.S. Vice President.

How could Dr. Lowell, President of Harvard University, oppose the nomination of his law school’s greatest student?

Well, this was 1916 in the United States.

“Abbott Lawrence Lowell… was a bigot — a man of virulent prejudices who systematically used his position of power to exclude and oppress…. Lowell’s worldview amounted to undisguised white Christian supremacy…”
Writing the Wrong: A. Lawrence Lowell by Simon W. Vozick-Levinson

After four months of public hearings in this venomous environment, Brandeis was confirmed by a Senate vote of 44–22 with 27 abstaining. And a good thing it was, because Brandeis turned out to be one of the greatest Supreme Court justices in U.S. history; who penned landmark opinions defending free speech, privacy, and judicial restraint that are still invoked by current justices.

Sadly, over a century later the state of our body politic has seemingly regressed on this account. Today, a Brandeis clone would not merit a Senate confirmation hearing, public or otherwise. Let’s imagine the excuses that’d be trotted out:

• Too progressive for a lifetime appointment.
• Too likely to view the Constitution as a living document whose interpretation must balance present realities, while protecting the values that the framers meant to protect.
• Too willing to “make the law respectable.”

If by some infinitesimally small chance a Brandeis clone was nominated for the next Supreme Court vacancy, the Senate wouldn’t even hold a hearing. Something is wrong here. When the Senate knowingly refuses to perform its duty to provide advice and consent, something is wrong. When the Senate breaks the rules to change the rules our framers envisioned in the framework of Article I of the Constitution, something is wrong.

But it’s not just in the Senate where things have gone astray. It’s the entire federal government. It’s state and local governments. It’s Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians too.

Our executive and legislative branches of government, at all levels, no longer embody the core values of citizens independent of economic status; the core values the framers meant to protect, and those which Brandeis so zealously championed.

Most public servants these days don’t serve the public. Without “frank expression of conflicting opinions,” there can be no “wisdom in governmental action.” There can be no compromises. Few frank discussions take place in government today because the influence of money is nearly insurmountable. Lobbyist money. Social welfare money. Dark money. And a lot of it.

This closes off the political process to middle-class and low-income citizens, conservative and liberal alike. These are the people Brandeis zealously represented.

Money in politics is big business. Between all candidates, “nearly $6.5 billion” was spent exerting influence on politicians and voters. Shortly after inauguration day, throughout the country, campaign cash and dark money started pouring in to politicians to fuel the next election cycle.

The current state of politics is infected with toxic influence. Disinfectant is required. As Brandeis wrote in Other People’s Money-and How Bankers Use It, “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.”

It’s time to expose dark money and hypocrisy in politics, and to call out those who knowingly disregard their duty and besmirch the honor of public office.