The Problem With The Left’s Idea Of What A Judge Should Be
I’ve just started reading a media copy of Judge Charles Pickering’s Supreme Chaos (His book was advertised on RWN and I’m working on getting an interview with him) and there was a quote in it from Nan Aron, the president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, an influential liberal activist group.
Here’s what Nan had to say on National Public Radio:
“Because the Republicans now control the House, the Senate, and the White House for the first time in basically a hundred years, there is obviously no way we’re going to get any new rights created by Congress. So now we have to look to the courts to create new rights that we won’t be able to get from the legislature.”
Folks, that is the essence of everything that’s wrong with the liberal approach to the court. For the court to act as a super-legislature, to have a handful of men and women in black robes simply impose their will upon the people regardless of what’s in the Constitution is not only undemocratic, it’s inimical to everything the Founding Fathers intended.
When the Supreme Court acts as people like Nan Aron intend it to, it leads to the sort of brutal confirmation battles we’ve seen of late, quite properly lessens respect for the court, and undermines the rule of law.
That’s why it’s so important to get predictable, textualist judges like Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court. The more judges we have who believe in following the Constitution and leaving politics to the politicians, the better off we’ll all be.