It’s the Judges, Stupid

NRO ^ | September 01, 2004 | Kathryn Jean Lopez

[neverdem]

	E-mail Author Author Archive Send to a Friend <% printurl = Request.ServerVariables("URL")%> Print Version

September 01, 2004, 1:07 a.m.

It’s the Judges, Stupid
Judicial activism is a theme the GOP has to drive home.

New York, N.Y. — The timing for an unfortunate judicial decision could not have been better. Last Thursday, a New York federal district-court judge ruled that the partial-birth-abortion ban signed by the president last November is unconstitutional — at least as the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution.

The majority of Americans support a ban on partial-birth abortion. But the Supreme Court has their “privacy” concerns and related activist hang-ups.

For Republicans meeting in New York this week, what better issue — outside the war on terror — is there to raise? The Democrats in the United States Senate refuse to confirm judges — refuse to even allow up-and-down votes on some of them. Why isn’t Miguel Estrada on a federal bench today? That’s a question that needs to be asked during the prime-time hours. Tell his story. Tell the story of the Left — which said he was somehow not Hispanic enough to be qualified for the bench (or at least qualified to meet their liberal litmus tests and racial quotas). Imagine watching the image of Russ Feingold berating Bill Pryor because he and his wife changed vacation plans for their young family to avoid Gay Day at Disney.

At a breakfast meeting with National Review editors this week, National Republican Senatorial Committee head George Allen said that the judges controversy is “an issue that really fires up Republicans” — but not only Republicans. He said that on the issue of “the fairness of affording . . . individuals a vote” the party can reach independents, too. An independent may not agree with the Republican platform on abortion, or one or another issue, but, says Allen, “Independents . . . care about fairness.”

Give Americans a clear picture of the injustice of the Left’s obstruction tactics, and let them see the long-term significance of the Democrats’ hijacking of the courts. Paint them a picture; it will rally them. Judges should be a consistent theme for the Republican party this week, and through Nov. 2.

And, though not singularly, who better to drive the issue home than the president himself?

Leonard Leo, executive vice president of the Federalist Society, agrees that the issue is a potential winner. “The role of our courts is a critical issue in this election. Every major policy issue is finding itself before judges — Internet pornography, marriage, education, partial-birth abortion, religion in public life, and so many others. Where judges legislate from the bench, they disenfranchise the people, and if that fact makes it to the surface this election season, I think you could see voters react.”

 

	http://www.nationalreview.com/lopez/lopez200409010107.asp

[Aetius]

Its a shame one of the good speakers at the convention hasn't made this an issue. I fear Bush does not have the rhetorical ability to make clear to the public just how important this issue is. But he should at least try.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Good point.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

The problem with politicians is that they are politicians.

It is approximately the same with lawyers.

The problems often overlap.

[RockAgainsttheLeft04]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.
American's have a greater degree of personal and political freedom than any other nation on the face of the earth, but if anybody thinks we have as many liberties as we used too, they should think again.

While the elected presidential and congressional representatives of the American people still have the final say in foreign policy and monetary issues, the increasingly radicalized judiciary is beginning to attain COMPLETE control over social policy in the U.S.

As it now stands, the ruling of the unelected, unaccountable justices of the Supreme Court on any social/domestic issue is the final authority. The president and congress are essentially powerless to override the opinion of the 9 through any logistic mean (a Constitutional Amendment, of which there have been only 17 since the Bill of Rights were created, is near to impossible to attain. By this time, the courts have done their damage). No popular referendum or act of legitimate legisllation can override the court's rulings. The justices rule FOR LIFE, and there has been intensive fraud (repeatedly lying to the Pres. and the public) undertaken
by many of the liberal justices to attain appointment in the first place. There is little we can do to stop the liberal activist judges from creating their own laws, and shredding legislation they disagree with from the other two major branches.

Because of this dangerous, radical trend, I have begun to believe that the U.S. now has de facto TWO governments, and that, since the federal courts answer to no one else, and that their power is unchecked by the will of the people, the Federal Courts have become a kind of social-issue DICTATORSHIP in the U.S.

God help us if we can't reverse the trend.

[TomServo]

bttt...