The judicial system in America is based on a fundamental principle that judges come to the bench, unimpeded by their own prejudices, and render decisions based solely on the facts and the law. They were to render those decisions without regard to a person’s race, religion, social or economic status or political affiliations. In other words they were to remain, like Caesar’s wife, beyond reproach, above suspicion, agnostic in their political beliefs. It is for these reasons that lawyers argue that the court should be immune from attack for rendering unpopular decisions. But those concepts and thus the rationale for judicial immunity are being severely tested, primarily at the hands of “judicial activists.”
Somewhere along the way, lawyers convinced judges that they should not be impartial arbiters but rather that they had a “duty” to right all wrongs, to cure societal ills, and to promote a political agenda most often embraced by the left. Forgotten in all of this is that the right to create policy, to cure societal ills, to set the course for the ship of state lies, not with the judiciary, but with the legislature in cooperation with the governor. On a national level it is the Congress and the President who make policy, not the United States Supreme Court.
But that whole concept appears to have been lost in the last several decades as the Senate debates the nomination of Supreme Court justices. Well, that’s not exactly right, it’s only when the Democrats in the Senate debate the nominees of Republican Presidents. We have watched the Senate confirm radical leftists like Justice Ruth Ginsberg, former general counsel for the ACLU, with nary a negative. But when a Republican President nominates, we have circus shows for justices like Thomas, Scalia, Roberts and now Alito.
The attacks of the Democrat left are vicious and personal and most always laden with hypocrisy. For instances, in the latest round of hearings on the Alito nomination we were treated to the following from some of the biggest hypocrites and blowhards in the Congress:
“He refuses to enforce core constitutional standards protecting individuals against low-level government officials in routine situations. There’s no reason to believe he’ll say no to a president who violates individual rights under the cloak of national security.” Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass, a current member of the Owl club that discriminates against women and Jews.
“When I look at all the evidence before us, Judge Alito’s writings, his statements, his judicial records and his opinions, and the little we learned about him in these hearings, I am forced to conclude that he should not serve in the Supreme Court.” Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., a man who had to confess to plagiarism in school and on the campaign trail.
If one is pro-choice, in this day and age, in this structure, one can’t vote for Judge Alito. It is simply that simple. I am very concerned about the impact he would have on women’s rights, including a woman’s right to make certain reproductive choices.” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., thus demanding that membership on the United States Supreme Court be limited to only those who embrace her political philosophy.
Well, so much for integrity. The liberal Democrats, having lost both chambers of the Congress and the Presidency, are now left to plow their agenda with judicial activists. Similarly, their ilk populates Oregon’s appellate courts. And it is precisely for this reason, these same liberal Democrats don’t want judicial restraint, unbiased jurists, politically agnostic judges. They want, and regularly get, fellow liberals imbued with a moral and intellectual superiority that disdains legislatures, voters and public opinion. And why not, by virtue of education, training, and political connections, they are better, smarter, superior in every way.
And to prove it, they regularly overturn the wishes of the voters, make up new law, create “penumbrae of rights” where none exist, and walk the rigid line of liberal orthodoxy. And that brings us to the latest outrage.
School activists, led by the teachers unions have filed suit in at least 35 states with the sole purpose of having the judiciary take over determination of the level of funding for schools. Think not, get out your checkbooks, it’s about to get very expensive.