WSJ: Who Will Judge the Inquisitors? - Sen. Schumer invites criticism and many judicial questions.

Wall Street Journal ^ | July 21, 2005 | RICHARD A. EPSTEIN

[OESY]

...I heard Senator Charles Schumer, somber and self-righteous, reach, as he so often does, for the microphone, to announce that gilt-edged credentials are not enough. In his view, all nominees must be vetted for the soundness of their ideological positions....

I hope that Judge Roberts resists the temptation to talk too much about past cases lest he prejudge future ones. Frankly, I care more about his willingness to listen than his ability to declaim at length. And I enthusiastically support his candidacy even if he rejects, publicly or silently, every outlandish position I hold dear. The fate of his nomination does not turn on my views.

I, of course, do not labor under the same institutional constraints that face Judge Roberts. Hence I should like to take up the gauntlet thrown down by Sen. Schumer to identify three recent Supreme Court cases that I disagree with....

Every time I defend my views, I am rightly at risk for criticism and refutation. But Sen. Schumer thinks his views set the gold standard for constitutional interpretation. But he, too, should be at risk to questions about his deeply held beliefs. Here is how I would start....

Note that my three cases all involve situations in which responsible constitutional interpretation requires some strong acts of judicial intervention. Liberals like Sen. Schumer think that this presumption works in cases like gay marriage... and abortion....

[A]s I said before, I have no idea what Judge Roberts' views are on these questions. Nor, for the confirmation process, do I care. My main point here is that Sen. Schumer's own views are subject to powerful intellectual counterattack, so that before he and his allies cast stones on John Roberts, he should recognize that he and his ilk also live in a glass house.

[OESY]

Mr. Epstein is the James Parker Hall Distinguished Service Professor of Law at the University of Chicago, and the Peter and Kirsten Bedford Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. His next book, "How the Progressives Rewrote the Constitution," will be published this Fall by the Cato Institute.

[HawaiianGecko]

 

 

	I think we should all start asking questions of Senator Schumer. Using his own pathetic logic, it doesn't matter that a majority of his constituents voted for him. His ideological positions are what is important. After all, this man is part of a group of people that actually "MAKE LAWS." We simply cannot allow a majority of people in only one of fifty states to put this man into the Senate. We should run him through a gauntlet of questions. We need to know how he would vote on issues. Judge Roberts' votes will only be on the constitutional validity of laws.  Chucky's votes actually effect people's lives.

 

[Inwoodian]

Re Schumer: There are few things more dangerous than a fool with self-confidence.

[GVnana]

TV cameras create stampedes in the Senate.

[ken5050]

Rush had it perfectly yesterday. Schumer is absolutely "killing" the Dems in the rest of the country..IMHO, the MORE he's on the air..the better off for the GOP..

[1Old Pro]

Schumer is absolutely "killing" the Dems in the rest of the country

I agree. He is the new "face" of the Democrat Party and he comes accross as an arrogant putzhead. His voice is grating, his demeanor is offensive.....all good if the dems want to lose any more of their "moderate" base or the reagan dems.

[rllngrk33]

It would appear that he has an affinity for the Televison camera.

You're right, the most dangerous place in Washington DC is between Chuck Schumer and a TV camera.

[Dilbert56]

NJ Senator Corizine once said that sharing a media market with Schmuck Chumer was like sharing a cage with a gorilla, or something similar. Schmucky got pissed and threaten to call a news conference denouncing Corizine's comments. Q.E.D.

[Liberty Valance]

Who Will Judge the Inquisitors? - Sen. Schumer...

New York Blue state, liberal democrat voters. Just makes you giddy all over doesn't it?

[NordP]

I just wrote to Schumer, and this is what I said...

Dear Senator Schumer,

I don't understand why you are always so angry. We had to deal with your President who was more interested in playing golf and girls, than working on world problems. Sure, he made a few important decisions now and then, but for the most part it was what the presidency could do for him, and not the other way around. We dealt with it, when he made choices for judges you didn't hear the anger that you hear on TV now that we're making them. Yah, we were holding him accountable for the fact that he needed to be WORKING in the Oval office...I don't think that our concerns were out of line on that.

Now, you all need do, is be fair. The wishes of the few cannot overpower the decisions of the majority. 3 million votes and the gain of all the House and Senate seats equal our calling the shots.

I leave you with two words - anger management.

It's not all about you and those you supposedly represent, it's about the Country that our President represents. We was elected by a solid majority, we put him there for a reason.