Cruising for a Borking

Perusing the Weekly Standard, dated 7-1, I find that thanks to Robert Bork’s defeat as a nominee to the US Supreme Court back in 1987, the US is no longer operating under a constitutional government.

Surprising? Yeah. Surprised me anyway.

According to William Kristol, "For the last 18 years constitutional jurisprudence has continued to drift away from a sound constitutionalism based on the written Constitution and a proper deference to popular self-government."

That’s odd.

When I last looked at a book on constitutional law, the US supreme was and is in the business of interpreting a written constitution. At least that's what it's been doing every since the case of Marbury vs. Madison way back in 1803.

The cure, according to Kristol?

Oppose the nomination of his attorney general , Alberto Gonzales to the Supreme Court. Why? "(I)t’s simply a fact" writes Kristol, that "Gonzales does not have the stature of several other possible candidates."

That’s a "fact" which is subject to some argument.

First off, Mr Bush hasn’t put forward any candidates to replace Justice Sandra Day OConnor, who wants to retire.

But Mr Kristol, of course, has.

Kristol’s nominees include, Michael McConnell, of the 10th Circuit; J. Michael Luttig, of the 4thCircuit and the recently confirmed Janice Rogers Brown, of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals

What about these folks? Who are they and how come Kristol likes them so much?

McConnell generally supports states rights but doesn’t like the idea of the federal courts actually dealing with state-federal matters. In other words the Fourteenth Amendment is just fine, as long as the federal courts don’t actually enforce it. He says he’s opposed to school prayer, but his opposition is merely formal. The same goes for his attitude towards public displays of religious images; he claims he supports decisions outlawing them on government property, but only for reasons that have nothing to do with the question of church and state, but merely on how best to present the images to the public. McConnell does not support separation of church and state at least in its Jeffersonian form. He is very much in favor government support for religious institutions . And of course, McConnell doesn’t like Roe v. Wade.

He really doesn’t like it.

In fact you could say he’s got some kind of obsession with Roe v. Wade and seems to salivates at the idea it could somehow be overturned.

J. Michael Luttig has little to recommend him. However, he believes in capital punishment and does not appear to believe in a woman’s right to an abortion. Good enough for Kristol.

Janice Rogers Brown has done nothing to merit a US Supreme Court appointment. However she has gone on record as opposing the New Deal. She also dislikes affirmative action, government regulation and abortion rights. And she lets everyone who’ll listen know it. Especially far-right groups, whose gatherings she sometimes speaks to.

Bottom Line?

Kristol’s nominees are strongly borkable. In fact are in need of a good borking.

Fact is, opposition to abortion rights is cause enough to oppose any nominee to the federal courts.

Mr Bush, if he has any sense, will put forward Alberto Gonzales. Whatever you might think of his political views, Gonzales, unlike Mr Kristol believes that he goes to work every day and labors under a constitutional government. Gonzales does not believe that Roe v. Wade should be overturned. Knows full well that it cannot be overturned. Not in the real world.

Gonzales world is rooted in reality. Kristol’s world? Well, that doesn't resemble Earth, it more clearly resembles Altair IV.

Punditwalla--