« Susan Torres: A Gianna of Our Time | Main | The Incredible March of the Penguins »

Shall We Unconfirm Stevens?

As Senate Democrats rifle through the minutiae of John Roberts’ life looking for…well, whatever they might find that would defeat his nomination to the Supreme Court, news outlets are reporting today an object lesson in perspective by current Justice John Paul Stevens. Stevens was appointed in the late Jurassic period and has been an agent for judicial oligarchy in faithful service to the lunatic fringe ever since. Lately he has been heard shooting off at the gavel before a no doubt cooing American Bar Association on the evils of capital punishment.

It seems the Beneficent One’s beef with the Constitutional process that results in death sentences is that it is not reliable. He cites two (ahem) fatal flaws to our current system: we cling with illiberal enthusiasm to the anachronous use of juries, and we have made the dubious decision in many states to hold judges accountable via the election process. Juries and elections? What is this, 1787? This will not do.

Of course, Stevens’ march through American jurisprudence has been akin to Sherman’s march through Georgia, and there amid the smoldering detritus of capital punishment, abortion regulation, federalism and the rest one can see that Steven’s real complaint is the legislative process itself. He would have punishment meted out by unaccountable judges without bothering with juries, and the justice of the punishment would be determined by these same judges without regard to the will of the people.

Stevens’ remarks were particularly critical of statements to juries by victims’ families. Stevens said such a statement "serves no purpose other than to encourage jurors to decide in favor of death rather than life on the basis of their emotions rather than their reason." Ah, savor the irony. Justice Stevens, wrapped in the bloodstained banner of the abortionists, demands that we choose life!

But like a Stevens majority opinion, I digress. I only wish to point out: If John Roberts had cast comparable aspersions on any pet issue of the left, such as affirmative action, his confirmation would be toast. Is there any question that Stevens has been ruling on capital punishment cases based not upon his understanding of what the law is, but what he thinks it should be? It seems we either must acknowledge the elephant in the Constitutional living room by admitting that the Supreme Court is a political branch of government featuring individuals with political philosophies, or we must admit that John Paul Stevens should be unconfirmed and shown the door.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on August 7, 2005 4:55 PM.

The previous post in this blog was Susan Torres: A Gianna of Our Time.

The next post in this blog is The Incredible March of the Penguins.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Powered by
Movable Type 3.34