Lest Ye Be Judged Another backlash you can expect from this will be a right-flank assault on the judicial branch. Actually, such has been happening for a while, but now the low-key approach can be discarded. "Rogue judges" will be coming under fire, despite the fact that the Schiavo case is all about existing legislation. Hey, I wrote that. Those words came on the heels of the Terri Schiavo case, as unfortunate a cultural spectacle as we will ever see in this country. Such a prediction didn't exactly require a crystal ball, of course. It makes me look no smarter than the average farmer who pierces a bull's nose with a brass ring to keep the animal from rooting up the yams. Still, judges are coming under fire in ways never before seen, literally and figuratively. Consider the recent radio rants of Focus on the Family's James Dobson, who compared today's judiciary to yesterday's KKK. After Schiavo died, Tom DeLay popped his foot out of his mouth long enough to say, "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior." Sounds serious. In what way will they answer? Will roaming hit squads go after their families, as happened in Chicago when a defendant hired someone to slaughter the judge's husband and mother? Will unsatisfied litigants become prone to going wild, grabbing a bailiff's sidearm and shooting willy-nilly, as seen in Atlanta? Is DeLay referring to Supreme Court Justice David Souter being punched in the face on his morning jog? DeLay has his own problems, though, with Shays' Rebellion on his heels. At any rate, the judiciary isn't the bailiwick of the House; it is in the Senate where the main event will soon take place. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R., Tenn) wants to utilize what has been termed the "nucular option". At some point in the near future, Frist will call for an up-or-down vote on whether to rule out the filibuster. Even if John McCain defects, the Republicans will garner a tie, which will be broken by Vice President Dick Cheney. The Democrats have said that, if such a thing were to happen, they would shut down the daily agenda in the Senate, grinding the legislature to a halt and ending all hopes of bipartisan cooperation. That's severe, but maybe that's what the Republicans want, so that they can continue to harp about "obstructionist liberals" for the next several years. In GOP parlance, it's called "governing". All of the talk about judges trying to legislate from the bench comes off as fairly stupid, which translates into fairly effective when directed toward the conservative base. One need not travel far to find someone who will complain bitterly about these "activist judges." More than anything else, that makes me feel embarrassed for conservatives, for it only proves that they really don't know very much about our political system. In a way, it makes them undeserving of freedom. The Schiavo case exemplifies that point perfectly. We are a nation of laws, upon which all cases are presented and all decisions rendered. How can one blame judges, any more than lawyers or juries, when they are following the laws that are on the books? The feelings of "the people" should not be taken into account in any courtroom. Such squishy-headed notions used to be the domain of liberaldom, but here come the conservatives, running on emotional fumes. What they should obviously do is blame the lawmakers. Why isn't Tom DeLay saying that? Anyway. The bombardment continues. After he stepped down as Attorney General, John Ashcroft threw his two cents out there. "The danger I see here is that intrusive judicial oversight and second-guessing of presidential determinations in these critical areas can put at risk the very security of our nation in a time of war," He was obviously defending his baby, the Patriot Act. Go away, John. The ever-righteous Dobson chimes in again, this time attacking one of his own in Arlen Specter (R., Penn), who chairs the Judicial Committee in the Senate. He is perceived by Dobson to be in the same lifeboat as those hapless Democrats. Enjoy the invective while you can: "Sen. Specter's message is clear. Cheer for the ouster of Tom Daschle if you must, but don't think the obstructionism is going to stop, at least not if you try to place a judge on the federal bench who believes that preborn children should not be murdered in their mother's wombs... The people who put President Bush back in the White House and expanded the Republican majority in the Senate weren't voting for a party - they were voting for candidates who share their pro-family values." There it is again, the old "will of the people" argument. Dobson, Ashcroft, DeLay, Frist and others seem to have no regard whatsoever for our institution of laws, no respect for our political traditions. Bush is no different. That's why he deliberately tossed a double-fistful of largely unacceptable candidates among his many judicial nominations, knowing that the Democrats would block them (which is their job as they represent those heathens, their constituents). Considering that the GOP is going "nucular" over just ten nominees out of more than 200, you'd think that the filibuster itself is anathema to their so-called values. So, during two terms, how many times did Bill Clinton have his judicial nominees blocked by Republican filibusters in the Senate? Do you know? Do you want to know? Sixty-three. So what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander. That's the problem with the Republican Party and its supporters in a nutshell - which is where some of these people belong. Paul Heller 04/18/05 << back to the archives
	All site contents © 2005, Paul F. Heller