 Cynthia Tucker |
Posted on 04/03/2005 6:42:45 PM PDT by Gondring
Friends of Florida judge George Greer describe him as a low-key conservative Christian, a Republican, a family man, a dog lover. Appellate courts have found over and over again that Greer simply followed the law in deciding a sad and controversial case. But for that sin, the Pinellas County Circuit Court judge was invited out of his Southern Baptist Church.
|
|
Apparently, Greer's critics, including his pastor, didn't like his rulings in the Terri Schiavo case, which landed in his courtroom in 1998. They wanted him to be an activist judge -- a jurist who ignored the law and ruled according to the passions of a group of partisans.
Ultraconservatives want you to believe the term "activist judge" applies to a group of determined liberals whose rulings have overturned historic precedent, undermined morality and defied common sense. But the controversy that erupted around Schiavo, who died on Thursday, ought to remind us once and for all what "activist judge" really means: a jurist whose rulings dissatisfy a right-wing political constituency.
Over the next few months, you'll hear the term "activist judge" often as President Bush nominates justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. The president could end up appointing as many as four. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, 80, is ailing with cancer; John Paul Stevens is also an octogenarian. Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg are cancer survivors in their 70s.
With so many likely vacancies, ultraconservatives see an opportunity to drive from the bench any semblance of fealty to the law or the U.S. Constitution. They claim that judges have become the tool of an outlandish liberal fringe that has violated the graves of the Founding Fathers. When right-wing talk-show hosts and U.S. senators denounce judicial activism, they conjure up images of jurists who terrorize the God-fearing, coddle criminals and would -- according to one crazed campaign memo passed around during last year's presidential campaign -- outlaw the Bible.
The next time you hear those claims, think of Judge Greer, whose politics tilt to the right. He is among the targets of ultraconservative ire.
For that matter, think of the current Supreme Court -- hardly a bastion of liberalism. Its justices declined to intervene in the Schiavo case because they could find no legitimate reason to do so.
While the rift between Michael Schiavo and his in-laws, Bob and Mary Schindler, is depressing, family conflict is almost a way of life in America. Courts are called upon often to settle family disputes over money, children and property. Florida law makes clear that a spouse has the right to decide end-of-life issues, and, after testimony from several people, Greer upheld Schiavo's claim that his wife didn't want to be kept alive through artificial means.
It is perfectly understandable that the Schindlers were unhappy with his ruling. As grieving parents, they wanted to believe, contrary to the judgment of several physicians, that their daughter might one day be miraculously restored.
But the attacks on the judiciary by the Schindlers' supporters -- including an attempted end-run by an activist Congress -- made it clear that a minority of religious extremists have no respect for the law and no understanding of the separation of powers on which this government was founded.
Among those who missed their high school civics class, apparently, were Congress and the president. In one of many rulings turning down the Schindlers' request for intervention, an Atlanta federal court judge chastised the executive and legislative branches for overreaching.
"Congress chose to overstep constitutional boundaries into the province of the judiciary. Such an act cannot be countenanced," wrote Judge Stanley Birch, who was appointed by former President George H.W. Bush. Hardly a liberal activist.
The current President Bush has already made clear that his idea of a model chief justice is Clarence Thomas, who has no respect for judicial precedent. But even Thomas might not satisfy the extremists who chastise Judge Greer. They will be satisfied with nothing less than a judiciary steeped in the same narrow religious views they want to impose on the nation.
Cynthia Tucker is editorial page editor for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. She can be reached by e-mail: cynthia@ajc.com.
Our problem always has been the Godless, soulless, country-club Republicans descended from the Whigs who ended up with no choice but us or the Democrats.
For Judge!
That's charming. I guess you have missed the Jew and Catholic bashing on this forum.
The Justices on the Supreme Court do not have to adhere to precedent ~ after all, it's their job to establish precedent.
And pray tell me, what has the RTL gained in the last 32 years? If you think there is even an inkling that the SCOTUS will ever rule against abortion you are living in twinkle land.
You are the one who flew onto the thread starting insults right off the bat - we aren't beating you on the head - YOU are insulting us.
And that teaching applies across the board - not just to concentration camp guards but to people who use legal pretexts to hide behind judges.
The rule of law has nothing to do with judicially-sanctioned murder. One might as well say that Stalin's showtrials were OK because they proceeded according the strict legal procedures of the Soviet Union.
This country would not even be an independent nation if our forefathers had adhered to a theoretical rule of law devoid of any moral content.
You know, sort of like the word "racist" or "homophobe".
Many of the Christians on FR were criticized pretty heavily for embracing Jesse Jackson's 'outreach' to a 3/4 person, and here we have Cynthia Tucker held up as a leading and sure voice of the backlash to come.
Puhleeeeze!
The only bashing and anti-Christian hate I've seen on this thread has come from your direction. Shame on you.
No, Greer fouled this case up many many times.
Unfortunately, for all her knowledge, none of it stuck. When you get right down to it, it's terribly difficult to Christianize a sociopath.
---
"The rule of law has nothing to do with judicially-sanctioned murder. One might as well say that Stalin's showtrials were OK because they proceeded according the strict legal procedures of the Soviet Union.
This country would not even be an independent nation if our forefathers had adhered to a theoretical rule of law devoid of any moral content."
Well said.
I think the religious right is a term often used by the media to try to provide separation in our party. There are always exceptions to the rule, buy listening to Cynthia Tucker is like beating your head against a brick wall. It's pretty unproductive.
I am also not sure why you think those who disagree with you on this question are somehow lesser believers. There's only one test to determine a follower of Christ....those who put their faith in the finished work of Christ on the cross as an atonement for their sin. If that makes me a "Christer" - I demand to be found guilty.
What do I stand for, as a Christian, that you do not?
This is a SERIOUS question.
You know nothing about Catholics. I know about Baptists. Let it go.
I agree. It's a term to make distinction where none really exists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.