Will our Checks and Balances work?

The Supreme Court is my least favorite branch of government. Ever since John Marshall decided that the court has judicial review in Marbury v Madison, I felt that there was too much power concentrated into the hands of unelected, for-life officials. Perhaps if the court had stuck to a strict interpretation of the Constitution I would have thought differently, but court rulings like those involving the American Booksellers and Indianapolis, where they decided that pornography was 1st amendment protected, or Roe v Wade, etc., haven't made me a big fan of the Supreme Court.

That may change.

Since 2001, things have been happening in the government that are not good, to put it too plainly. We, the American people, are seeing our freedoms taken away. The Patriot Act in the former administration, with it's infamous "Sneak and Peak" warrant provision, took away some of our privacy.

But as long as it's being used against bad guys, it's ok, right? Not until the government's definition of "bad guy" changes to start including suspected "racists" and "hate crime advocates" like preachers who speak against homosexuality.

And, of course, the Obama administration is still using the Patriot Act's power with warrantless surviellance , but all the blame will go to the other guy.

The Supreme and Circuit Courts have limited the power of the Patriot Act (thankfully), acting in proper concordance with the entire system of Checks and Balances.

Now we'll see what they'll do about the forced buying of health care and the government's attempted takeover of the internet businesses.

Nothing scares me more than the last bit, by the way. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but if the government takes over the internet, our main source of news and communication, we're in a bit of trouble.

Which is exactly what will happen if the government is able to offer its own internet.
How can a private, tax-paying corporation operating under a sovereign government compete with that government, which makes the rules, doesn't need to make a profit and can cover all losses by simply printing more money?

This, by the way, is a foundation of conservative beliefs.

I'm thankful for the District of Columbia Court of appeals standing up to the FCC and the beginnings of an attempted takeover.

But I wonder how far our court systems will go to protect us further? Will it be able to stand up to the President over the issue of forcing private citizens to buy insurance from a private company? Can the government force us to buy things? I say no; Obama says yes.

So do all the liberals. Where will the court rule?

I cannot wait until one of the Houses go to the other party; I may not fully support the Repubs, but I'm a firm believer in Hobbes' metaphor of a government. It's a leviathan, a monster. And all the monster has been doing since 2001 (or since FDR, really) is getting stronger. The leviathan wants to consume more power, for no other reason than to grow. I'd rather have the monster eating itself than us.

But will the courts stand up to the beast?

Can the people? Because I firmly believe the federal government will never relinquish a power it has been allowed (by us) to give itself. All the federal government will do is add power, slowly or quickly, depending on the watchfullness of the people.

And what is the end result for the leviathan that can only grow and never diminish? I think that's an important question for us, as we are living on the same island as the beast.