06 October 2004Politics
Why Kerry Must Win

I'm not a huge fan of John Kerry. I think he'll make a decent president. He'll certainly do a better job than what we've had for the last 3 + years. However, the reason that it's crucial that he win this election is simple. The Federal Courts.

Comic

We've got a serious problem coming up in the next 4 years. Many members of our aging Supreme Court could retire. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, 80, has more than hinted at his desire to leave jurisprudence prudence behind and hit links. Justice Stevens is 84. O'Connor is 74. Ginsberg, a cancer survivor, is 71. All but one, Clarence Thomas is over 65.


Now George W Bush has already said that his nominees to the court will be in the mould of Scalia and Thomas, strict constructionalist and arch-conservative. Replacing Rehnquist with another conservative will have little or no affect on the many 5-4 decisions that the court has brought down in recent years. But in replacing progressives Stevens and Ginsburg and moderate O'Conner, Bush could swing the balance of the court to the right in a way that will affect decisions for years to come and put in jeopardy cases like Roe v. Wade, amongst others.

Both Kerry and Bush would love to be first president to nominate an Hispanic American to the bench. If Bush is re-elected his choice could be Alberto Gonzales. Gonzales is the legal mind behind the memos circulated in the corridors of power about how the Geneva Conventions didn't apply in Iraq and Afghanistan. He set up the military tribunals. He's responsible for the decision to label American citizens as "enemy combatants", enabling the government to hold them indefinitely without charge or legal counsel. He's a scary individual and he's only 47 which means he could be levying his controversial brand of justice for 30 years or more, far beyond the limited years in which a president's policies can do damage. (Remember that Rehnquist was nominated by Nixon). Not a happy prospect. Another possibility is that he might replace Ashcroft at the Justice Department. But that would only leave a spot for someone equally conservative but less controversial to take his spot as Bush's nominee.

And even more dire problem is 4 more years of Republican nominees headed to the federal bench. Federal courts hear far more cases and can do much more damage to civil rights, the environment and other sensitive issues that the Supreme Court could ever dream of. 8 straight years of conservative court packing is going to leave this country in a sorry state.

I'm not sure why this issue isn't a major one on the campaign trail. Maybe the campaigns don't want to scare swing-voters, but I think it's sad that we can't have a discussion about this on a national level when the future of this country hangs in balance.

Posted by andrew at October 6, 2004 12:10 PM


Comments

brian Says:

Andrew writes: "I’m not sure why this issue isn’t a major one on the campaign trail."

Because:

1) 9/11 "changed everything."
2) Iraq and the economy are sucking up all time in the stump speeches.

But seriously, it is an important issue - and hopefully, at the very least, the Dems will regain control of the Senate.

October 6, 2004 05:20 PM
Andrew Writes:

Well, even with 9/11 and Iraq and the economy, they still manage to talk about health care and a few other agenda items. The scary thing is that long after some of these more expedient problems have gone away or at least drifted into the background, the legacy of the sumpreme court will live on.

October 6, 2004 05:50 PM




Remember me?

(You may use HTML tags for style)

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.americanidle.org/MT/mt-tb.cgi/821

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference:
'Why Kerry Must Win'.