Dem Senators View Justices Politically Rather than Judicially

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Adam's Apple, Aug 1, 2005.

  1. Adam's Apple

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Apr 25, 2004
    Thanks Received:
    Trophy Points:
    It Must Be the Heat: This Nominee Drives 'em Crazy
    By Paul Greenberg, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
    August 1, 2005

    In the strange fight over the confirmation of John Roberts as the next justice of the Supreme Court, perhaps the strangest comment yet had to be the one from Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana on CNN's "Inside Politics":

    "You wouldn't run for the United States Senate or for governor or for anything else without answering people's questions about what you believe. And I think the Supreme Court is no different." Huh?

    Being nominated for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States is no different from running for the United States Senate or a governorship or anything else? Because a candidate for the Senate or governor is expected to tell us how he feels about some hot-button issue--like abortion, for example--we should expect a nominee for the Supreme Court to do the same? Of course not.

    A nominee for the court shouldn't be taking stands on political issues precisely because he is notrunning for a legislative or executive office. Instead he's been nominated for a seat on the highest court in the land, and there is a difference, a big one.

    Unlike a senator or a governor, a justice of the Supreme Court is sworn to do impartial justice. Which means he shouldn't even come close to prejudging issues that are likely to come before him.

    for full article:
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page