Now that Supreme Court Justice Souter is to retire, Obama will have his first chance to appoint a new justice to the United States Supreme Court. Speculation is rife, with most political pundits saying that Obama will be pressured to select a woman, and probably a Hispanic woman. Well, Obama is too smart to talk about that possibility, at least for now. After all, a person’s gender and/or race should not at all be taken into account when considering the qualifications for a prospective Supreme Court judge. Of course if Obama were to appoint a woman, a Hispanic or an African-American, few objections would be raised. Many objections would be raised if Obama were to appoint a Causasian man, especially if he were not a true liberal. The latter, of course, is extremely unlikely to happen. You can bet the farm on that.
As I said, Obama is too smart to mention race and/or gender when he publicly talks about Supreme Court appointments. However, I do not at all like what Obama is reported to have said. Obama supposedly said that he prefers someone with “empathy” for “people’s hopes and struggles,” and someone with a “sharp and independent mind” and a sense of compassion. Obama is reported to have said, “I will seek someone who understands that justice isn’t about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook. It’s also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people’s lives — whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation.” Now those words terrify me. They demonstrate that Obama is a demagogue; he is a political leader who appeals to the hopes, fears, prejudices and emotions of most ordinary people. Hey Obama, a judge is not supposed to take into account “how our laws affect the daily realities of people’s lives”. A judge is supposed to judiciously apply and interpret existing law or laws. It is legislators who are supposed to take into account how laws affect the daily realities of people’s lives, among other things. It is only legislators who propose, debate and then pass or fail to pass new laws. Judges are not legislators. Senator Orrin Hatch said that Obama’s comments about naming a justice who understands Americans’ problems and has empathy for people is “code” for putting in place a person who legislates from the bench. Those words of Obama’s also tell me that Obama most probably does not care about the primary function of the United States Supreme Court, which is to maintain consistency and order in federal law, mostly in accordance with the words set out in the Constitution of the United States and its amendments.
Well, I am not a dummy. I know that what Obama wants is a Supreme Court Justice who will be in favor of Obama’s agenda, the US Constitution and “empathy” be damned. Obama will never publicly state that, of course, although whomever he does appoint will be someone that Obama will say has “empathy”. Obama may not actually use that word “empathy” again, but he will use other words to convey the same meaning.
One of the things that has been frightening to me during the past several months has been the huge increase in the involvement of the federal government in our economy. I have heard some lawyers and judicial experts even say that many of these federal actions are unconstitutional. But to date I have neither heard nor read of any person or body going to Court and instituting a law suit claiming that something is unconstitutional. Given what appears to be some of Obama’s criteria for a Supreme Court Justice, such an action is even more unlikely to happen. Let’s face it, the new Justice will almost probably be a minority, and he or she will be a liberal who is very much in favor of most if not all of Obama’s agenda. As far as Obama is concerned, there is no requirement that a new Justice understand the United States Constitution and interpret it correctly. Of course Obama will never say that because he is a clever demagogue.