Conservatives and pro-lifers have gained ground in the White House, the US House, the US Senate, and in many state legislatures and governors’ mansions. Yet America’s tyrannical judiciary continues its demolition of the nation, her laws, her morals, and her traditions.
It's time to stop the “just wait until we” mentality, and the process-over-substance mentality, and win in the judiciary, which is where so much of the real ruling of this country takes place.
The biggest obstacle of the moment: The Senate filibuster as applied to the president's judicial nominations. The filibuster allows a minority of 41 out of 100 senators to block a vote on almost any substantive question that comes before the Senate. The filibuster rule is not in the Constitution, nor has it always been part of Senate procedure. It is something that has come and gone over 200 years of Senate history. The simple answer to the problem: Eliminate the filibuster rule for judicial nominations, or for all presidential appointments. This can be accomplished through a simple majority vote, a method that has been used to change similar Senate rules numerous times in the past.
This seemingly arcane debate about Senate procedure has become white-hot.
Why should pro-life, pro-family citizens in Middle America care? The simple reality: The only practical way of restoring democratic rule on the issue of abortion, and thus the possibility of legal protection for unborn children, is by getting good judges on the federal bench, particularly the US Supreme Court. It's also the only practical way to prevent “rights” to euthanasia and to same-sex “marriage” from being magically discovered in the Constitution and imposed on America. Other methods — constitutional amendments, impeachment of bad judges, comprehensive court jurisdiction stripping, presidential non-enforcement of unconstitutional judicial rulings — will not work or will not happen in the foreseeable future.
The increasing use of “international law” to justify activist decisions by the US Supreme Court should be enough to make all law-abiding Americans fear. The United Nations, the European Union, and others have been trying to insert abortion rights, privileges for homosexuals, and other innovations into international law. If activist judges succeed in establishing the principle that American courts should follow international law, we will have no defense against what unelected international bureaucrats wish to impose. In recent landmark decisions legalizing sodomy and outlawing the death penalty for minors, the US Supreme Court has cited international law and the practices of other nations as justifications for the new rights they discovered.
The only way to get those good judges — and good Supreme Court justices when the time comes — into those black robes is to abolish the filibuster for judicial nominees. Filibusters of legislation would be unaffected by Senate Republicans' proposals.
And if people of faith don't stand up now, they will be excluded from the federal bench forever. Leftists have referred to these nominees' religious beliefs about abortion and “gay rights” as unacceptable. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) complained about Catholic nominee William Pryor's “deeply held beliefs” on abortion in justifying his opposition to Pryor, even though as attorney general of Alabama, Pryor had an impeccable record of enforcing legal precedents such as Roe v. Wade on abortion cases as well as on everything else.
Democratic senators have filibustered ten of President Bush's most judicial of his judicial nominees, that is, those who prefer to interpret the law rather than make it. That's part of having a judicial temperament. Bush and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) ask that the nominees get an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. They will be confirmed by majority vote if they do. And that will pave the way for up-or-down majority votes when Supreme Court vacancies arise.
Some whine that eliminating the filibuster for nominees will prevent pro-life senators from filibustering the left-wing nominees of a future pro-death president. But pro-lifers have never successfully filibustered any such judicial nominees in the past. In fact, no judicial nominee with majority support in the Senate has ever before been defeated via filibuster. Leftist Democrats have set a new precedent. We shouldn't expect social conservatives to follow it.
Frist made a reasonable offer to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) on April 28. It would apply only to higher-level judicial nominees, not to other presidential appointments or to legislation. “Circuit and Supreme Court nominations placed on the Executive Calendar [for Senate action] and available for debate should receive an up or down vote,” he wrote in a letter. “Accordingly, I propose establishing a procedure by which every Supreme Court and circuit court nomination can be debated for up to 100 hours on the floor of the United States Senate.
“Such a structure will allow for robust and extended discussion of whether an individual should be confirmed, and will give the nominee — no matter who is president and who is in the majority — an up or down vote when debate concludes.” Reid and company rejected the offer. When the Senate returns from it latest recess May 9, Frist will likely have the votes and the impetus to end judicial filibusters permanently.
The filibuster fight has stirred up some fiery rhetoric. Freshman Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO), who said during his campaign that judicial nominees should get up-or-down votes only to flip-flip immediately upon entering the Senate, called Focus on the Family “the anti-Christ” for condemning the judicial filibusters (and for other good things that Focus does). Reid refers to those who believe that judges shouldn't make law as “the far Right.”
California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown, whom Bush has nominated to a federal appeals court, told a group of Catholic lawyers after the Bridgeport, Connecticut, diocese's Red Mass, “These are perilous times for people of faith, not in the sense that we are going to lose our lives, but in the sense that it will cost you something if you are a person of faith who stands up for what you believe in and say those things out loud.”
In a recent poll, 81% of Americans agreed with the statement, “Even if they disagree with a judge, Senate Democrats should at least allow the president's nominations to be voted on.” It's time to make this happen.
If you would like to express your opinion on ending the filibusters of the president's judicial nominees to your state's two senators, call the US Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121, or obtain direct numbers at www.senate.gov.
Joseph A. D’Agostino is Vice President for Communications at the Population Research Institute, a non-profit organization dedicated to debunking the myth that the world is overpopulated.
