Liberals Want Ideological Quotas On Supreme Court

OUR BELOVED American liberals are nothing if not transparent. After introducing us to the joys of racial quotas at the university and gender quotas in the firehouse now they want to impose ideological quotas on the United States Supreme Court.

But thanks to the piercing insights of postmodernism—another priceless gift to the world from liberals—we can understand what they are about. They want to preserve their power.

Liberals understand that the best they can hope for is to keep the ideological balance in the Court as it stands today, to elevate retiring Justice Sandra Day O´Connor to the status of a true conservative in the mold of Edmund Burke and to create a conventional wisdom that a sharp shift to the right on the Court would be a betrayal of Burke´s sacred memory. Thus E.J. Dionne rhapsodises about O´Connor.

She likes narrow rather than broad rulings, and dislikes abstract theories. She goes one case at a time. She´s interested in particular facts, in particular cases.

Liberals who once exulted in the sweep of cosmic principle now appreciate O´Connor´s feminine interest in the close-at-hand “and her constant wrestling with small things.” They see her as a bulwark against a revanchist conservative court that

will roll back the ability of elected officials to legislate in areas such as affirmative action, environmental regulation, campaign finance, and disability and labor rights.

It´s always comforting to read liberals misunderstanding what conservatives are about. What conservatives are about in the question of the Supreme Court is not the ability of elected officials to legislate. Conservatives understand that liberal elected officials live to enact comprehensive and mandatory federal programs on everything except the behavior of liberals in the bedroom. They understand and accept that. What conservatives want to roll back is the ability of unelected judges to legislate from the bench.

In the last generation the courts have arrogated to themselves the right to legislate for the legislative branch and administrate for the executive branch. They operate on the same basis as Justice O´Connor. Her “one clear judicial principle was that Sandra Day O´Connor should get to decide all the important questions before the country.” Conservatives think that this is wrong. It is wrong in the first place because the whole point of a limited government with separation of powers is that the legislative branch legislates, the executive branch administers, and the judicial branch judges—and not the other way around. It is wrong also for a practical reason. When judges get things wrong, when they arbitrarily take abortion out of the legislative arena thereby preventing an orderly compromise between the warring parties, or when they decide to administer school districts and then screw them up worse that the already screwed-up elected officials, what can the people do to redress their grievances?

Liberals fail to understand that their activist jurisprudence in the past half century has done enormous harm to the nation and to the edifice of law and justice itself. We can allow that their activism issued from a natural human impatience to sweep away the accumulation of oppression and injustice, especially the shameful precipitate of Negro slavery. But in this hankering for justice liberal judges succumbed again and again to the temptation to put a thumb upon the scales of justice, to make sure that it came out with the right result. It was worse than a crime, it was a blunder, and liberals have only just begun to pay for their world-historical mistake.

Sphere: Related Content |

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com. His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

TAGS

Chappies

“But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.” —Freddy Arbuthnot
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison

Civil Society

“Civil Society”—a complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churches—builds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust

Hugo on Genius

“Tear down theory, poetic systems… No more rules, no more models… Genius conjures up rather than learns… ” —Victor Hugo
César Graña, Bohemian versus Bourgeois

Education

“We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.”
E. G. West, Education and the State

Faith & Purpose

“When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of ages—they seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings...”
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990

Conversion

“When we received Christ,” Phil added, “all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.”
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh

Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy

Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006

China and Christianity

At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing

Religion, Property, and Family

But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family. Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit

Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity

US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism

mysql close 0