The Crusade against judges

Right wing conservatives control the presidency and the Congress. But they don't control the judiciary, at least not as much as they want. They don't feel like waiting for four more years of Bush to complete the job. So, judges have become their next target. Given that several judges have been physically targeted, you'd think responsible conservatives might want to tone down the rhetoric just a tad. You'd think they would fear that being associated even indirectly with violence would hurt what they see as an intellectually sound cause.

Conservatives are targetting so called activist judges. The label 'activist judge' is applied to any judge who insists that legislators respect the federal and state constitutions. For example, some 'activist judges' insist that constitutional provisions concerning equal protection of the law for all citizens actually apply to all citizens. No exceptions.

To some conservatives, this is tantamount to the sky falling.

Fundamentally, the right wing claims that legislators can do whatever they want regardless of what any constitution says. In other words, constitutions are meaningless.

This situation is ironic since this is precisely what conservatives had been complaining about for decades when they were largely out of power, at least federally. When programs like the New Deal and Great Society were implemented, conservatives complained bitterly that they were unconstitutional.

According to their present logic, such programs were fine and dandy because they were passed by elected legislators and shouldn't have been overturned by unelected 'activist judges.'

In reality, 'activist' is a transparent code word for liberal.

Why? Opponents of 'judicial activism' usually define this as a willingness by unelected judges to strike down laws passed by elected legislators, By this definition, two of the three most 'activist' judges on the Supreme Court are the far right justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas... the two justices most admired by the states' rights and always-defer-to-legislators crowds. [For more on activist conservative judges, click here]

At the end of the day, it's no surprise that the far right is targetting judges that do outrageous things like saying constitutional protections also apply to fags and non-Christians... just like others revolted when such protections were to be applied to niggers. As a populist movement based on alleged victimhood and martyrdom, the far right need oppressors to demonize in order to keep the faithful in a siege mentality. They control the presidency. They control the Congress. They've cowed the news media into eunichs. Going after judges is the next logical step.



Update: This piece in the Christian Science Monitor suggests that the judiciary is far less liberal than the chicken littles of the far right would have you believe.

Republican appointees now constitute a majority of judges on 10 of the nation's 13 federal appeals courts. As few as three more lifetime appointments on key courts would tip the balance in favor of GOP appointees on all but one appeals court - the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

While not all Republicans are far right conservatives, I can't imagine recent Republican presidents would've chosen many Ted Kennedy-style liberals for the bench.