2008 Woodie Awards
A Left-Wing Supreme Court Under Bush?
Christian E. Savage
Issue date: 1/26/05 Section: Perspectives
- Page 1 of 4 next >
I know, I know. You're probably like, "What the HECK is he talking about? A LEFT-wing Supreme Court will result from President Bush, who pledged to 'put conservative judges on the court in the mold of [Clarence] Thomas & [Antonin] Scalia, right? Well, that is exactly what I am saying. Now, before you "jump off of the deep end," let me explain. For example, who is to say that exemplary jurists like Judge Thomas & Scalia should be measured on the POLITICAL standard of being a "conservative?" On the contrary, President Bush actually affirmed CLEARLY in the third and final Presidential Debate with Sen. John "Flip-Flopper" Kerry (a.k.a. J.F.K II) that "...it is obvious that my opponent is for a litmus-test on abortion.... My ONLY litmus-test is this: to put judges- [in the mold of Thomas & Scalia]-that will STRICTLY interpret the Constitution [and the law] and not LEGISLATE from the bench."
In other words, President Bush's position is that "good conservative judges" should NOT be measured by a "political standard" like their position on abortion or gay marriage, but by the IDEOLOGICAL standard that the Federalist Society founded by Alexander Hamilton (Note: In 1789 Hamilton's philosophy was termed "broad constructionism" because-unlike the radicals like Thomas Jefferson who believed the document should be interpreted FUNDAMENTALLY literal-he felt that judges should interpret the Constitution literally but into CONTEXT). Hamilton's "ideological standard" according to Federalist Paper #78, was simple: "It is the duty of the Court to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor (CLEAR & DIRECT wording) of the Constitution [null &] void (Judicial Review)....this does not suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power, but rather that the power of the PEOPLE is superior to both and that where the will of the legislature declared in statutes (or "laws") stands in opposition to that of the people declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former."
In other words, President Bush's position is that "good conservative judges" should NOT be measured by a "political standard" like their position on abortion or gay marriage, but by the IDEOLOGICAL standard that the Federalist Society founded by Alexander Hamilton (Note: In 1789 Hamilton's philosophy was termed "broad constructionism" because-unlike the radicals like Thomas Jefferson who believed the document should be interpreted FUNDAMENTALLY literal-he felt that judges should interpret the Constitution literally but into CONTEXT). Hamilton's "ideological standard" according to Federalist Paper #78, was simple: "It is the duty of the Court to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor (CLEAR & DIRECT wording) of the Constitution [null &] void (Judicial Review)....this does not suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power, but rather that the power of the PEOPLE is superior to both and that where the will of the legislature declared in statutes (or "laws") stands in opposition to that of the people declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former."