Saturday, May 02, 2009
Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged
As the initial skirmishes begin over Barack Obama's pick to replace David Souter, the conservative Committee For Justice released it's own "marker" position on the type of judges that should be considered.|
Note these two passages (emphasis added) :
To Republican senators:
Take your time in examining the President’s Supreme Court nominee. Republicans on the Judiciary Committee should not be afraid to ask the kinds of tough questions that Democrats asked of nominees such as Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito. In particular, the next Supreme Court nominee must be asked whether they share the President’s decidedly activist view that judges should consider, not just the law and facts, but also empathy for certain classes of people, including African-Americans, the poor, gays, and the disabled. You owe it to the American people and to senators not on the Committee to ensure that support or opposition to the nominee is based on thorough scrutiny of their record and judicial philosophy.[CUT]To red and purple state Democrats:
Remember the values of the regular folks who sent you to Washington. Don’t vote for a Supreme Court nominee whose values are closer to those of the intellectual elite than to those of your constituents. Let President Obama know now that you will not appreciate being put in that position. While it’s too early to know how much money will be spent on advertising to defeat an activist nominee, it is virtually certain that the money will be directed at red and purple state Democrats.
So, on the one hand, Republicans must make sure that a nominee doesn't share the "activist" viewpoint of declaring "empathy" with "certain classes of people" -- but red and purple-state Democratic senators must guarantee that they share (empathze with) the "values" of their constituents!
So, what is it about -- the "rule of law" as COJ asserts? Or inquiring about judges empathy is OK -- depending on whom they are empathizing with?