Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Molly Pitcher; Lando Lincoln; quidnunc; .cnI redruM; Valin; yonif; SJackson; dennisw; ...
Part I : http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1437560/posts

Thomas Sowell:

...What is even more dangerous than this political fixation on abortion is the underlying notion that judicial nominees are to be confirmed or voted down on the basis of how they might rule on particular policy issues.

The separation of powers means not only that judges should stay out of policy issues that belong to legislative bodies but also that the Senate should respect the judicial branch and not try to predetermine how judges will rule on legal issues.

What Senate liberals of both parties want to do is extract some kind of commitment that judicial nominees will not reverse Roe v. Wade. Judicial nominees should not be chosen by the President to reverse Roe v. Wade or rejected by the Senate if they don't pledge to uphold it. Respect for the Constitutional separation of powers should apply to all three branches of government.

...The upcoming Supreme Court confirmation battles in the wake of the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor are seen by too many people in terms of the Senate's comity and consensus. You can always get a consensus by surrendering.

With Senate Democrats united and Senate Republicans divided, comity and consensus mean letting the minority party determine what kind of Supreme Court will be making laws for our children and grandchildren to live under. What is the point of having elections if the winners are going to act like losers and vice versa?

...The media add to the confusion by constantly labeling judges "liberal," "conservative" or "moderate," rather than distinguishing judges who are activists who ad lib versus judges who follow the laws as written, including the Constitution.

That is the distinction that will determine whether this country will live under the rule of law as a self-governing people or whether we will continue to become more and more subject to the fiats of unelected judges. That issue trumps comity, consensus and particular policy issues combined.


Nailed It!
Moral Clarity BUMP !

    This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of good stuff that is worthy attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately on my page.

       Besides this one, I keep separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson, Orson Scott Card, David Warren and Lee Harris (sometimes). You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about).

4 posted on 07/07/2005 4:58:58 AM PDT by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Tolik

President Bush has said that there will not be a policy litmus test used to select judicial nominees but the Senate has not made any such pledge when it comes to voting on these nominees.

Anyone care to bet that WHOEVER Bush sends up it'll be an "extraordinary circumstance" according to the democrats?


5 posted on 07/07/2005 6:11:47 AM PDT by Valin (The right to do something does not mean that doing it is right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson