Judicial Activism

In the rising accusation that Clinton did it first, don't forget, Tom DeLay was providing the drag during Clinton's terms against Clinton's power of appointment. In the rising steam of presidential privilege palaver, don't forget, the power of appointments was severely hindered in Clinton's terms by the drag of delay by Tom DeLay.

In 1997: [Herman Schwartz in Washington Monthly Judges, watch your backs : The Congressional Republicans have officially declared war on "judicial activists," judges who go beyond interpreting the law into the realm of what GOP lawmakers consider "making" the law. Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia is but one of several Republicans to denounce the current crop of jurists for "assuming for themselves the powers and responsibilities of legislators or executives"--an offense those on the right say must not be treated lightly. They have been particularly incensed over a few recent decisions setting aside death sentences, excluding evidence in a drug case, and blocking the implementation of the California referendum ending affirmative action programs. This May, Barr joined Majority Whip Tom DeLay of Texas in calling for the impeachment of judges as a "proper tool" for "political offenses," with an impeachable offense defined by DeLay as "whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history" Their stated goal, according to DeLay: "The judges need to be intimidated"

With an eye toward weeding out future judicial activists, GOP senators have virtually hijacked the appointment process. Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch has declared he will not "stand by to see judicial activists named to the federal bench" To this end, Hatch and his fellow Republicans have instituted a massive slowdown on judicial appointments. According to political scientist Sheldon Goldman of the University of Massachusetts, who has been studying the nomination process-for 40 years, the Republicans are engaged in an effort "unprecedented in its scope... to deny the Clinton administration as many nominations as possible"[emphasis added]

No doubt the present maladministration hopes all this has slipped away into the recesses of history, and only the right wing still hears echoes of the early attacks on the presidential power to appoint justices that reflect the president's - and thereby the voters' - viewpoint.

The fact is, presidential appointment to the judiciary was a contentious issue during the DeLay attacks on presidential powers, and was used to jimmy away residual respect for the constitution by fear of lasting effects.

DeLay's expression of disgust with the refusal of federal judges to intervene in the case of Terri Schiavo was merely the latest in a series of assaults by some members of Congress on judges and justices who made decisions with which they vehemently disagreed. DeLay suggested that the responsible judges would be called "to answer for their behavior" and added in reference to impeachment charges, "There's plenty of time to look into that." In fact, as early as 1997, DeLay advocated impeaching federal judges who had issued rulings that were "particularly egregious."

DeLay's stance ignores the unbroken, two-century-long streak during which no federal judges have been impeached and convicted for their actions on the bench.

The historical efforts by the right wing of the GOP is being overlooked conveniently enough in the present row. Undermining Clinton was the aim of those late '90's attacks on the power of appointment. The unfortunate residue of disrespect for those powers is playing out now in the present regime.

The use of unadorned political manipulation directly on the judiciary reflects the DeLay effect. Judges are just another means of advancing a political agenda.

Justice is suborned by that long and concentrated propaganda campaign, which has had its effect of the GOP mind. The Constitution is next on the list to eliminate, so that the right wing can reign Supreme.