She Ain’t All That
So Justice O’Connor is retiring, and all the Chicken Liberals are running around screaming about the sky falling. Of course it’s unfortunate that she goes and not Rehnquist, though he may yet. Of course I’m disappointed that many good 5-4 decisions are possibly up for grabs. However, I really think there’s a bit too much lionization of O’Connor from the left. While it’s true that all those decisions hung on her vote, that’s also true about every vote in the majority. If we’re going to be so grateful for O’Connor’s votes, shouldn’t we also give thanks for the Justices who are more reliably liberal? Specfically, can we give it up for Justice Stevens?
The man is 85 and still going strong. He probably would’ve retired under Gore or Kerry, but he’s sticking it out for the cause. Let’s not forget he was also a Republican nominee, just like O’Connor, and he’s been significantly more liberal than her. Let’s also hope that he makes it to 88 with sound mind and sound body.
evan :: Jul.01.2005 :: Notions :: 6 Comments »
You’re missing the point. O’Connor and Kennedy represent a breed of conservative that is quickly vanishing these days: the thinking conservative. Not to say Stevens is one, but knee-jerk liberals on the Court would be useless if only because they would write poorly reasoned decisions that would result in either Congress or a later Court overturing them. In that way, O’Connor’s knack for finding a middle of the road reason to agree with the more liberal maority can be seen as vital to the success of good, G-d fearing progressives like ourselves against the forces of evil in this country.
Its possible the thinking conservative isn’t vanishing. It may just be hard to spot them. A lot of people talk about how being on the Supreme Court challenges and changes people. Its one thing to be conservative on social issues, but its another thing entirely to impose that view on the entire country with the finality of a constitutional declaration by the US Supreme Court that will be analyzed and scrutinized for centuries. Plus, the fact that Supreme Court justices can’t really be fired or promoted makes them more independent in their thinking once they reach the High Court. I realize that doesn’t explain Clarence Thomas.
Nor does it explain Janice Rogers Brown, who testified that she believed it was her duty to apply a law higher than the US Constitution.
In Thomas’ case, the explanation seems rooted in his breathtaking arrogance. He just thinks he knows better than the six decades of Supreme Court majorities that preceded his appointment. (As far as I can tell, that sentiment is at the root of the “Constitution in exile.”)
There are many people in positions of power who do not think in the Enlightened sense you allude to, and they do not seem inclined to start.
Not that any of this matters. We’re going to run out of oil soon enough*, and then the end will come swiftly and without mercy.
*See David Goodstein, Out of Gas: The End of the Age Of Oil (W.W. Norton & Company 2004) (2005; Kenneth S. Deffeyes, Hubbert’s Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage (Princeton University Press 2003).
Marc, could you give us a link for Judge Brown’s Senate testimony? All I can find that supports your assertion was that speech she gave to IJ, and I doubt that’s what you meant to reference.
I’m willing to take you at your word on oil. I can’t wait to buy one of those soy diesel trucks like they had on the West Wing. And I take no position on whether principled liberal jurisprudence is poorly reasoned or likely to be overturned or invalidated by acts of Congress.
If I leaned left, I would wholeheartedly agree with Force’s original post. I admire it for its emphasis on principle.
Interesting that Katie implies that voting consistently voting in line with a political ideology is principled.
I have to retract my assertion about Brown. I certainly couldn’t find anything in the record of her Judiciary Committee hearing to support it. If ‘IJ’ is the Institute for Justice (I’m not really up on your right-wing acronyms), then I will say that her speeches are pretty disturbing to me for a number of reasons. We can discuss that via email if you like.
The Marshall Islands is developing coconut power. But I think there is even less coconut in the world than there is oil, especially once you start to factor in Mounds/Almond Joy consumption.