Washington Post Makes Case To Block Any Obama Supreme Court Nominee


Linda Hirshman thinks she’s being wise in stating why the Court needs to go to the left, but unintentionally makes the case for the GOP Senate to refuse to consent to any Obama nominee

After 45 years of conservative rulings, here’s what a liberal Supreme Court would do

Nothing separated the odd couple of the Supreme Court — the late Justice Antonin Scalia and his best buddy, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg — more than their visions of the Constitution they both loved. Scalia saw the Constitution as a “dead” document, limited to the meaning of the original words at the moment the ink was dry, a moment when white, propertied men ruled. Ginsburg’s Constitution, by contrast, is the expansive charter of an evolving society. She celebrates “the extension (through amendment, judicial interpretation, and practice) of constitutional rights and protections to once ignored or excluded people: to humans who were once held in bondage, to men without property, to the original inhabitants of the land that became the United States, and to women.”

In other words, a liberal Court will rule by feelings and beliefs, rather than law and the Constitution. One which will manufacture “rights” out of the air, giving some people more rights than others. Hirshman yammers on for a long time about “inclusiveness”, as well as building up unions, removing all rules regarding abortion, and other measures, but, if you read between the lines, what we see is about using the Supreme Court to massively increase the power of the Federal Government over our lives, over our Free Speech rights, our ability to protest, our ability to practice our religion. It’s essentially a screed against the 1st Amendment, and, I’m sure if she had more time, against the other 9 original Amendments. Remember, the Bill Of Rights was never about what rights were assigned to citizens: it was about limiting the power of the Federal Government, telling it what it could not do.

An evolving view would diminish those limits on the federal government, perhaps even removing them. Lord knows, the federal government has worked hard to do this for a long time. A fully activist, hardcore Progressive court would do immense damage, and Democrat supporters should remember the old adage “be careful what you wish for. You might get it”, meaning these same losses of freedom could bit you in the rear.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Related Articles

25

Is Obama’s Commie ‘Green Czar’ A Quitter… Just Like Palin?

Obama made a huge mistake thinking that everyone in America hates their own country just like Reverend Wright, the killer

3

The Truth About the Balanced Budget

Truth In Accounting had an incredibly important 50 state study that needs to be broadcast far and wide. It shows

4

Teamsters Chief Says ‘Public Option’ Not Vital to Healthcare Reform

James P. Hoffa is now saying that if Obama pulls the “public option” out of his healthcare bill, it is

comments

Share this!

Enjoy reading? Share it with your friends!