ConfirmThem

By AndrewHyman Comments () / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

I previously posted the President's April 28 comments about whether or not Senate Democrats are opposing nominees because of their religion. See here. President Bush defended the Senate Democrats against that charge, and I think Bush was right.

The judicial as well as the personal philosophies of several nominees have indeed been scrutinized and scorned by Senate Democrats recently, and that is a radical and tragic departure from past Senate deliberations on judicial nominees, when the main question was whether or not the nominees were qualified (e.g. educationally and ethically). The Democrats are now wrongly opposing some of the nominees because of their judicial and personal philosophies. But, in my humble opinion, the Democrats couldn't care less whether a nominee's judicial and personal philosophies derive from the nominee's religion, upbringing, genes, or whatever.

The question used to be whether nominees could put their personal beliefs aside, rather than what those personal beliefs were. Senate Democrats are now trying to change that healthy tradition, and it would be a change for the worse. But, it is perfectly understandable given that the Senate Democrats believe judges are entitled to legislate from the bench.

There are two relevant constitutional provisions here:

#1) "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." This is the first sentence of the Constitution (after the Preamble).

#2) "[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." This is in Article VI of the Constitution.

The Senate Democrats are not violating #2; but they are violating #1, and that is bad enough.