Ability should overrule all issues

By Frank Salvato
web posted November 15, 2004

Since the re-election of George W. Bush there has been quite a
bit of talk about potential nominees to the US Supreme Court.
Those of us who live in the land of reality -- who aren't mulling
the black helicopter stolen election conspiracy theories of Greg
Palast and US Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) -- know that
President Bush will most likely be nominating more than one
jurist to the highest court in the land. Rather than the nominee's
personal preferences on individual issues we should be focusing
on their ability to safeguard the US Constitution.

Perhaps this subject matter best illustrates the sorry state of our
union-controlled education system, a system that places more
emphasis on political correctness and self-esteem than actual
education. When one believes it is appropriate to use a single-
issue litmus test when contemplating a nominee for the Supreme
Court it can be argued that they don't understand the function of
the third branch of our government. The NEA-fostered "dumbing
down of America" continues.

The US Supreme Court -- the pinnacle of the Judicial Branch of
our government -- has the daunting task of being the protector
and interpreter of the US Constitution. They do not create laws,
at least they are not supposed to. They are supposed to apply
the Constitution to problems brought before them deeming them
constitutional or non-constitutional. Law making is the job of the
Legislative Branch not the judiciary. This notion is progressively
escaping many jurists today. In the case of the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals, this notion has been forgotten altogether.

Many among the liberal-left and the radical-right are paralyzed in
ideological tunnel vision. It doesn't matter what the issue;
abortion, gun owner rights, prayer in schools, using the word
"God," some in our society believe that issue oriented litmus tests
are applicable when it comes to confirming or rejecting a
president's nominees to the Supreme Court. This ideological
tunnel vision is both shortsighted and dangerous. In fact, it is
limiting and in the end excludes some incredibly talented legal
minds from attaining their rightful place on the bench of the
highest court in the land.

One example of tunnel vision based ideological sabotage
occurred during the confirmation hearings of President Reagan's
nominee Robert Bork. While the liberal left branded him "anti-
abortion" and promoted the idea that he would single-handedly
overturn Roe v. Wade the fact of the matter is that Bork was --
and still is -- a proponent of judicial restraint, a concept in direct
opposition to the judicial activism we are experiencing today. He
believes the Supreme Court's task is to adjudicate from the
bench rather than to legislate from it. But politics being what it is,
Bork's nomination was rejected and ‘We the People' were
deprived of a brilliant judicial mind in the roll of sentinel for our
Constitution. Justice Anthony Kennedy was awarded the
vacancy and serves dutifully today.

The point here is this, it is infinitely more important to place
protectors of the Constitution on the Supreme Court than it is to
load the highest court in the land with politically acceptable, issue
oriented puppets of our political parties. It is critical that we have
jurists on the Supreme Court who hold the Constitution higher
than politics. They must live and breathe the liberty that sets forth
from our Founder's creation to all the people of the United
States not just those who have the power to get elected or lobby
our political process. Politics should not enter into the realm of
our Constitution.

It is for this reason that "We the People" should demand a level
of excellence for our Constitution's sentinels, a level of excellence
that far exceeds a one-issue litmus test. We must strive to court
and select the most brilliant constitutional minds within our legal
community, minds that will honor our Founding Fathers and their
creation. We need to elevate jurists who will weigh, with deep
contemplation, all the far-reaching implications of their decisions
without deference to pressure from special interests, no matter
how noble the cause.

The phrase, "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is more
than just a catchy tagline used on national holidays. It is the
precept included in the Declaration of Independence that helped
to inspire our Constitution. It is a phrase that epitomizes the
principles employed in the construction of the "contract" between
our government and the governed, the contract that is the US
Constitution -- the supreme law of the land.
 
Let us choose to employ the brilliant mind over the political
activist, the intellectually humble over the issue-oriented
narcissist. Let us choose sentinels to protect our Constitution not
political activists. Our nation's future may very well depend on
decisions made today by those we entrust with this duty.

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and the managing
editor for TheRant.us. His pieces are regularly featured in
Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The O'Reilly
Factor and numerous radio shows. His pieces have been
recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are
periodically featured in The Washington Times as well as other
national and international publications. He can be contacted at
oped@therant.us Copyright © 2004 Frank Salvato

Enter Stage Right -- http://www.enterstageright.com