G. W. Brooks

To the editor,

The founders of the various state governments, in their establishing the federal government and its Constitution, were well aware of the potential of not only the abuse of power but the power populism. Their creation of a federal Congress consisting of two separate houses with separate powers; one whose members are elected every two years giving more current and populist representation, the other having six year terms was originally intended to reflect a states long-term political outlook. The president, who once elected was to represent all the people as opposed to those in a states district or one state, holds office for a four year term.

The Supreme Court, which is seated for life safe, guards the Constitution for the long-term. Together Congress and the states can amend the Constitution; it requires no signature of the president or approval of the Supreme Court. In Coleman v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court declared the question to be non-justiciable, leaving the issue to Congress and accepting the precedent set by Congress' actions; establishing that not all questions of constitutional law allow for Supreme Court rulings. Only Congress and the states can rescind a previous amendment.

So what? Well, as Professor Sandy decries the recent ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court as a populist/liberal that he is, he should take heart and faith in the U.S. Federal Constitution’s amendment process. It may require an act of the U.S. Congress and concurrence of the states to amend the Constitution to deny corporate America the right of Free Speech but 27 have been passed. Such an amendment would need to define what a corporation is as workers, teachers and trade unions are corporations, as are non-profits including churches. Religions and non-profits already have (had as the court ruling frees free speech for them as well) been silenced by backdoor IRS rulings on their status for qualifying as non-profit corporations. Note, the establishment of a religion was recognized as more than just a right of conscience; a religion is understood to incorporate at least two or more people, as well as but not necessarily, land and buildings.

We may all remember how the professor stated that it was the universities which protected our free speech rights. Bravo professor, but it is the soldier who fought that secured as well as secures that right, and the U.S. Supreme Court which affirms it equally to all. The freedom of the people to assemble, it could have read, of individuals to assemble, thereby excluding corporate bodies; nor is their freedom to assemble limited to public meeting on street corners, parks or in town halls. Freedom of assembly would therefore include corporations, large or small, and their right to petition the government ensures their political speech.

G. W. Brooks

Meredith