The View from China and the Global Times

[Randy W]

This is an editorial of the Chinese edition of the Global Times on Wednesday. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

 

Posted in: Viewpoint

 

Partisan politics penetrates US courts

Source:Global Times Published: 2016-2-17 18:58:01

While the US values the principle of judicial independence, politics is still able to influence the principle's implementation and decides whether a sensitive case is more likely to be won by liberals or conservatives. The penetration of partisan politics into the top institute of US judicial system may invite suspicion about judicial independence or demand more explicit definitions of the limits of the concept.

 

The US didn't consider partisan politics when it adopted the separation of powers model upon its establishment. The emergence of partisan politics has eroded the US constitutional system, but no administration has ever reformed the mechanism. They all want to apply power to dominate the appointment of Supreme Court justices.

 

. . .

 

The partisan politics penetrates into US society more than generally assumed. Although this is often grumbled about by the public, the elites mostly benefit from the partisan politics. The two parties and their followers attack each other, but they all keep silent about the problems or make some superficial reflections occasionally.

 

Americans probably never think of grappling with partisan politics from the perspective of justice appointments. But the feud between Democrats and Republicans in the aftermath of Scalia's death has brought this to the forefront. All rules are made by humans and politics can always have an active influence. On this matter, even the US, a widely admired model of judicial independence, cannot consistently keep political motives out, as shown in the fight over Scalia's replacement.

 

[Randy W]

. . . and from the WSJ

 

One Party Stands to Benefit from Scalia Fight: China’s

 

But the pointed attacks in both newspapers on the notion of judicial independence suggested there was more to the pieces than a desire to poke fun at Washington’s political failings.

 

Under President Xi Jinping, Communist Party officials have been tasked with reforming China’s traditionally weak legal system. Their goal, outlined in a raft of legal reform documents, is to create courts that are independent enough to be accepted as legitimate but not so independent they can challenge the Communist Party’s ultimate authority.

 

In selling “socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics,” as the system is known in party writings, official media have portrayed the rule of law practiced in Western countries as unsuitable for China. In their Wednesday pieces, both People’s Daily and Global Times took the sales pitch further, depicting the U.S.’s highest court as a political battlefield incapable of delivering independent judgments.

 

People’s Daily cataloged a series of decisions it said showed the Supreme Court’s vulnerability to prevailing political winds, including the 2014 decision to kill limits on political donations, Bush v. Gore and last week’s decision to block Mr. Obama’s initiative to restrict power-plant emissions.