• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • About Towleroad
  • Towleroad on Social Media
  • Privacy Policy

Towleroad Gay News

Gay Blog Towleroad: More than gay news | gay men

  • Travel
  • Sports
  • Law/Justice
  • Celebrities
  • Film/TV/Stream
  • Republicans
  • Madonna
  • Books
  • Men
  • Trans Rights
  • Tech/Science
  • Royals
  • Monkeypox
  • U.S. House gives Biden a win with massive bill on climate change, drug prices
  • Robert De Niro pays tribute to ‘wonderful’ Anne Heche
  • Trump lawyer in June said classified material had been returned -NY Times

Occupy Wall Street Has Chosen the Wrong Enemy

Ari Ezra Waldman October 19, 2011

BY ARI EZRA WALDMAN

Occupy Wall Street (OWS) has been called a movement, a non-movement, a left-wing tea party, a hippy-come-lately sit in, and the expression of "broad-based frustration about how our financial system works." I don't know what it is, but I doubt it will turn into anything effective. Hedge fund fat cats seem like perfect enemies; in fact, liberals like Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and their Progressive Era allies created an entire political movement based, in part, on popular indignation about corporate shenanigans, trusts, and restraints of trade.

RobberbarronsThe political cartoon to the right, depicting an enormous corporate robber baron astride Congress and eclipsing the power of law, justice, and Uncle Sam was typical of the creative and pervasive satire of the day. The Progressives busted trusts, imposed unprecedented government regulations on food, passed landmark labor laws, and galvanized millions of urban and rural poor Americans who had been marginalized during the Republican Party's dominance in the late Nineteenth Century. Even President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal coalition — and its associated regulatory state that came to define America for the next century — took advantage of popular opposition to the wealth and extravagance of unregulated businesses during the interwar years.

But, Americans, at heart, have curiously mixed feelings about the so-called "fat cats" on Wall Street whereas they have decidedly clear (and negative) feelings about the "fat cats" that live a few hundred miles south, in Washington, DC. There are many reasons for that — most Americans feel they can become rich if people left them alone and the federal government has always suffered from a certain "otherness" in our social fabric. This oft-repeated thesis is not mine and it probably rings true, but it is beyond my area of expertise and outside the scope of this post. What I would like to argue is that if OWS would like to become a legitimate political movement or have any hope of influencing policy, it has chosen the wrong enemy. A far more appealing focus of the 99%'s indignation should be — and has been throughout American history — the conservative federal judiciary, in general, or the United States Supreme Court, specifically.

CONTINUED, AFTER THE JUMP…

The Supreme Court has been the target of political campaigns throughout (mostly recent) American history, and each campaign was successful. The Progressives did it, the New Dealers did it, and Nixon and Reagan did it by campaigning against Lochner v. New York, Schechter v. United States, and the Warren Court's criminal procedure decisions, respectively. Maybe activists should take a cue from history and focus on the modern Supreme Court's undeniable, unprecedented, and often radical pro-business tendencies rather than focus on those that simply make money.

Lochner v. New York (1905) was a landmark decision of a staunchly conservative Supreme Court that believed that the Constitution vested the state with little, if any, power to regulate contractual rights. The case involved a challenge to New York labor law that limited the number of hours bakers could work to a maximum of 10 hours in a day and 60 hours per week. A bakery owner who flagrantly violated the state law appealed his conviction up the ladder, arguing that states lacked the power to regulate his right to make his own contracts with his workers because the Fourteenth Amendment prohibited states from "depriv[ing] any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." The Court had previously held that this restriction on state power included both procedural — the framework of laws and procedural protections that made our justice system fair — and substantive — rights of individual liberty that were deeply ingrained in our nation's history — elements. In a sharply divided decision, the Court held that the state could not interfere with an individual's freedom of contract, both the bakery owner's and his worker's. If they wanted to get together and agree to be paid a certain hourly wage in exchange for a 14 hour workday, the state could not say otherwise, regardless of the alleged health, safety, and welfare benefits of labor protections.

Woodrow Wilson spoke about Lochner on a regular basis during his 1912 campaign for president (even though his writings soon after the decision while president of Princeton University seemed to agree with the result). He argued that the primary flaw in the Lochner Court's reasoning (reasoning that he, arguably ahistorically, attributed to the Framers, as well) was its rigidity: the Constitution, Wilson wrote, "is not a machine, but a living thing." After mentioning what he had come to view as a wrong decision in Lochner in his first inaugural address, President Wilson said that "[t]here can be no equality or opportunity, the first essential of justice in the body politic, if men and women and children be not shielded in their lives, their very vitality, from the consequences of great industrial and social processes which they can not [sic] alter, control, or singly cope with. Society must see to it that it does not itself crush or weaken or damage its own constituent parts. The first duty of law is to keep sound the society it serves. Sanitary laws, pure food laws, and laws determining conditions of labor which individuals are powerless to determine for themselves are intimate parts of the very business of justice and legal efficiency." Robert LaFollette, the progressive lion of Wisconsin, called Lochner the "greatest threat" to allowing the states to resolve the nation's problems. And, Louis Brandeis criticized the decision as cutting off the natural experimental legislative prerogatives of the states.

Lochner also became a cause celebre of the legal left, led by such luminaries as Brandeis, Benjamin Cardozo, Learned Hand, and Felix Frankfurter. They used this decision in their academic writings and impact litigation to exemplify the overstepping of a handful of unelected judges who sought to thwart the will of the majority of the people. And, this was Lochner's greatest appeal to a progressive movement that was starting to win federal and state elections and turning legislatures toward social reform.

The same meme characterized Franklin Roosevelt's and his allies' attacks on the Court's decision in Schechter v. United States (1935). Schechter, like Lochner, declared a liberal social or economic program unconstitutional. The case involved a challenge to the centerpiece of Roosevelt's New Deal, the National Industrial Recovery Act, commonly known as the NRA. The NRA allowed the executive to set various economic regulations, including, among many other things, price controls, wage fixes, and prices for whole chickens. Schechter, a chicken wholesaler who was charged with selling sick chickens into the stream of commerce, challenged the regulations as an overstepping of Congress's power to regulate commerce. The Supreme Court agreed, invalidating one in a series of New Deal social and economic programs. Congress could not regulate anything unless it had a direct impact on interstate commerce, the Court said, and Schechter's chickens were almost exclusively involved intrastate commerce.

Roosevelt and wide Democratic majorities in Congress and throughout most state legislatures railed against the Court's "antiquated," "dangerous," and "outdated" views. Up for re-election in 1936, President Roosevelt not only mentioned the Supreme Court 17 times in one speech in Pittsburgh, but ultimately proposed the famous "Court-packing" scheme whereby he basically dared the "old men" at One First Street to keep challenging his New Deal or face the appointment of one new judge (up to an additional six) for every sitting judge over the age of 70 years and 6 months. if it has passed, the President would have been able to stack the majority with jurists of his own political persuasion, thus ensuring the New Deal's survival. As it happens, Justice Owen Roberts, a conservative member of the Court, saw this for what it was — a challenge to the institutional independence of the Court — and rather than letting it happen, he switched his vote from anti- to pro-New Deal regulation in the 1937 case of West Coast Hotel v. Parrish. By the end of his presidency, Roosevelt appointed more justices than any president since Washington, "packing" the Court through natural attrition.

And, some thirty years later, while campaigning for the presidency in 1969, Richard Nixon blasted the criminal procedure rights revolution of the Warren Court — Miranda rights, the right to counsel, search and seizure protections, restrictions on police searches, the exclusionary rule — as part of his "law and order" campaign. Then-candidate Nixon pilloried liberal lions like Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justices Brennan and Douglas for "creating law" and "letting criminals out on the street" and "becoming activist judges making the law" where they should just be interpreting it. That meme has continued to this day unabated in the Republican campaign machine.

These political campaigns against alleged overstepping by the Supreme Court have all been effective. Wilson, Roosevelt, Nixon, and Reagan all won political and legislative victories by taking on the nine unelected "old men" who, they alleged, were out of touch with a majority of Americans, whether that majority be "silent" or in control of Congress. These campaigns worked because the Supreme Court, and the federal judiciary as a whole, is anti-majoritarian: it is constituted by unelected judges, appointed for life, with little oversight. It makes important decisions that impact our daily lives and it is accountable to few, if anyone. That anti-democratism has an important purpose — it insulates the search for truth and impartial justice from constantly swaying political whims; but, as a social movement, authoritarianism is a convenient enemy. It is a much more convenient enemy than individuals working to make money, something that most Americans want to do — and think they could — on their own. The Horatio Alger in our social fabric makes us natural allies with Wall Street, and natural enemies with unelected judges and, for that matter, anyone or any institution trying to regulate away our freedom. If liberal are to succeed in reorienting the national conversation, they cannot demonize millionaires just because they're millionaires; rather, they should focus on the institutional radicals who let the millionaires run wild.

***

Ari Ezra Waldman is a 2002 graduate of Harvard College and a 2005 graduate of Harvard Law School. After practicing in New York for five years and clerking at a federal appellate court in Washington, D.C., Ari is now on the faculty at California Western School of Law in San Diego, California. His research focuses on gay rights and the First Amendment. Ari will be writing weekly posts on law and various LGBT issues.

Follow Ari on Twitter at @ariezrawaldman.

Topics: History, News, Society, Supreme Court More Posts About: Ari Ezra Waldman, Law - Gay, LGBT, News, Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Wall Street

Related Posts
  • Russia Blocks Facebook, Accusing it of Restricting Access to Russian Media;
  • Duran Duran Has New Music And You Are About To Enjoy it. It’s 2021. Seriously.
  • ‘Mayor Pete’ Trailer; Papa Pete Pwns Tucker; 4-Stars for Dr. Rachel Levine; JoJo Siwa’s Perfect 10s; Lynda Carter’s 8 Wonder-full Words: GOOD NEWS
  • Robert De Niro pays tribute to ‘wonderful’ Anne Heche

    Robert De Niro pays tribute to ‘wonderful’ Anne Heche

    Published by BANG Showbiz English Robert De Niro has hailed Anne Heche as a “wonderful actress”. The Hollywood icon starred alongside the actress in the 1997 political satire ‘Wag the Dog’, and he’s paid a glowing …Read More »
  • Trump lawyer in June said classified material had been returned -NY Times

    Trump lawyer in June said classified material had been returned -NY Times

    Published by Reuters WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A lawyer for former U.S. President Donald Trump signed a statement in June that said all classified material held in boxes at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence had been returned to the government, …Read More »
  • I want to spread positivity, says Billy Porter

    I want to spread positivity, says Billy Porter

    Published by BANG Showbiz English Billy Porter wants to spread positivity through his work. The award-winning star insists there’s “no room for fear” in his life and he believes the entertainment industry can even help to …Read More »
  • J&J to end global sales of talc-based baby powder

    J&J to end global sales of talc-based baby powder

    Published by Reuters (Reuters) – Johnson & Johnson will stop selling talc-based baby powder globally in 2023, the drugmaker said on Thursday, more than two years after it ended U.S. sales of a product that drew …Read More »
Previous Post: « Lady Gaga Doesn’t Need a Halloween Costume for Gagaween: VIDEO
Next Post: News: Frank Kameny, Scorpion, Chord Overstreet, ROSAT »

Primary Sidebar

Adjacent News

  • Russian propagandists claim Moscow has been ‘studying’ Mar-a-Lago nuclear documents ‘for a while’

    Russian propagandists claim Moscow has been ‘studying’ Mar-a-Lago nuclear documents ‘for a while’

  • Southern Baptists say they face U.S. federal probe after sex abuse claims

    Southern Baptists say they face U.S. federal probe after sex abuse claims

  • FBI sought nuclear documents in search of Trump’s home -Washington Post

    FBI sought nuclear documents in search of Trump’s home -Washington Post

Good Trash: Going to Read It Somewhere, Y’know

  • Ellen Has Not Contacted Ex-Lover Anne Heche Following Fiery Crash Into LA Home

    Ellen Has Not Contacted Ex-Lover Anne Heche Following Fiery Crash Into LA Home

  • Pete Davidson Proposed to Kim Kardashian Before Their Breakup

    Pete Davidson Proposed to Kim Kardashian Before Their Breakup

  • New bombshell book on Trump reveals he wanted to be treated like Hitler: ‘Totally loyal’

    New bombshell book on Trump reveals he wanted to be treated like Hitler: ‘Totally loyal’

RSS Partner Links

  • Cara Delevingne Celebrates 30th Birthday with Star-Studded Boat Day Including Margot Robbie & More (Photos)
  • Commercial Vault: When Lauren Bacall sold us on the “deep-brewed flavah” of High Point coffee
  • Dick Slip + Armie Hammer's Tats + Trump Messes Up Defense + AGs vs. Don't Say Gay + MORE! — 12-PACK
  • Open Post: Hosted By The Dogs Who Ate A Winning $8 Lotto Ticket
  • Taylor Swift Is Eligible For An Oscar For Her Short Film “All Too Well”
  • Rihanna Wears Over-Sized Thigh High Boots During Late Night Outing with A$AP Rocky
  • Saturday Round-Up: Anne Heche dies; Ellen reaction; “The Prom” couple; Greg Berlanti & more!

Most Recent

  • U.S. House gives Biden a win with massive bill on climate change, drug prices

    U.S. House gives Biden a win with massive bill on climate change, drug prices

  • Robert De Niro pays tribute to ‘wonderful’ Anne Heche

    Robert De Niro pays tribute to ‘wonderful’ Anne Heche

  • Trump lawyer in June said classified material had been returned -NY Times

    Trump lawyer in June said classified material had been returned -NY Times

  • I want to spread positivity, says Billy Porter

    I want to spread positivity, says Billy Porter

  • J&J to end global sales of talc-based baby powder

    J&J to end global sales of talc-based baby powder

  • Hamilton creator Lin-Manuel Miranda slams unauthorised production

    Hamilton creator Lin-Manuel Miranda slams unauthorised production

  • ‘It’s really irritating’: Madonna’s son David Banda wears her clothes ‘better’ than her

    ‘It’s really irritating’: Madonna’s son David Banda wears her clothes ‘better’ than her

  • Analysis: U.S. move to negotiate drug prices a rare defeat for Big Pharma

    Analysis: U.S. move to negotiate drug prices a rare defeat for Big Pharma

Most Commented

Social

Twitter @tlrd | Facebook | Instagram @tlrd

Footer

Copyright © 2022 · Log in

×