Activist Michigan Supreme Ct In the Pocket of Insurance Companies

Brian Dickerson, Detroit Free Press columnist, is an awesome dude, if I may say so. Today, he published a column exposing the connections between big insurance and the Michigan Supreme Court. Dickerson asks: Wouldn't it be more efficient, for instance, if insurance companies paid the justices' salaries directly? The companies would save the hassle of laundering payments through the soft-money campaign finance machine, and their water carriers in Lansing could dispense with the charade of judicial impartiality. What a crackup! Unfortunately he's right. Justice Young, a Federalist, used to be vice president, corporate secretary and general counsel to AAA Insurance. His three neo-conservative buds on the Court are also Federalists. They always vote together on key cases. They hate when little guy's file lawsuits, favor using the dictionary rather than context and legislative history to interpret legislation, and prefer their rulings to benefit corporations and insurance companies. Interestingly, on this one, another Republican, Justice Elizabeth Weaver, actually dissented and criticized her Republican compatriots, stating: . . . the majority is eliminating over five decades of precedent that created specialized rules of interpretation and enforcement for insurance contracts . . . Presumably, as any person with a modicum of intelligence would know, the Michigan Legislature is aware of these rules of law and, if they disagreed with them, could overturn them anytime they want with new legislation. Hey, but why do that when neo-conservative activist judges can do it for them? Siding with Weaver was our more liberal, Democratic Justice, Marilyn Kelly. She was more pointed in her comments: The burden of this rule is carried by the average individual who has little, if any, bargaining power when purchasing insurance. . . . The choice made by the majority regresses our judicial system by decades, if not centuries. So, next time anyone tells you that the courts are out of control with liberal activist judges, politely remind them that it is the pro-business and anti-consumer activist judges funded by their respective interests that are upsetting the balance of power in our country. All this neo-conservative judicial activism costs you money. As Dickerson points out: Read the small print. If you want a reasonable insurance contract, expect to pay an attorney several hundred dollars to scrutinize it. Above all, don't look to Michigan's highest court for protection; it's already busy protecting somebody else.