You have reached your limit of free articles this month.

Enjoy unlimited access to myAJC.com

Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks.

GREAT REASONS TO SUBSCRIBE TODAY!

  • IN-DEPTH REPORTING
  • INTERACTIVE STORYTELLING
  • NEW TOPICS & COVERAGE
  • ePAPER
X

You have read of premium articles.

Get unlimited access to all of our breaking news, in-depth coverage and bonus content- exclusively for subscribers. Starting at just 99¢ for 8 weeks

X

Welcome to myAJC.com

This subscriber-only site gives you exclusive access to breaking news, in-depth coverage, exclusive interactives and bonus content.

You can read free articles of your choice a month that are only available on myAJC.com.

OPINION: Gorsuch offers chance to be nation of laws, not Left politics


My first experience with Senate confirmation hearings for a Supreme Court justice nominee was in 1991 at the hearings for Clarence Thomas.

I came to Washington to support Justice Thomas. The hearings were a national embarrassment. The main focus turned out to be about neither the Constitution nor about Thomas’ jurisprudence.

It was about Democratic senators descending to the gutter and dredging up the most disgusting garbage they could conjure to destroy the man’s character because his jurisprudence was not aligned with their left-wing agenda.

Fortunately, Thomas survived. But the wounds caused to him and the nation by that pathetic display remain.

Now another outstanding conservative judge, Neil Gorsuch, stands for confirmation and Democrats again grasp at straws to besmirch the character of this man and avoid, at all costs, serious discussion about the Constitution and the judicial philosophy and integrity of the nominee.

What we hear is that he is “anti-choice, anti-environment, pro-corporate,” and that he “harbors a right-wing, pro-corporate, special interest agenda,” siding “with the powerful few over everyday Americans just trying to get a fair shake.”

What bothers those on the left so deeply is they do not perceive that Judge Gorsuch favors those whom they want him to favor. In their view, he favors the rich rather than the poor. Business rather than workers. The majority rather than minorities.

It does not seem to dawn on liberals that Judge Gorsuch favors no one except the American citizenry, and that his singular aspiration is that we live in a nation with fair and objective law carried out by fair and objective judges. Perhaps even more outrageous to liberals is the possibility that Judge Gorsuch may see the law ultimately rooted in eternal and unchanging truths, not made up by a politician or jurist.

We need not look further than the judicial oath that every Supreme Court justice takes, pledging to “administer justice without respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and to the rich…”

In Judge Gorsuch’s own words: “Judges should be in the business of declaring what the law is using traditional tools of interpretation, rather than pronouncing the law as they wish it might be in light of their own political views.”

The source of the judicial oath taken by Supreme Court justices is the Judiciary Act of 1789, which established the federal judiciary.

And where did the drafters of the Judiciary Act get these standards for behavior for judges? It is reasonable that the source is the Bible.

The Book of Exodus says, regarding judges, “Do not follow the majority for evil. … Do not glorify a destitute person in his grievance.” And, in Deuteronomy, “You shall not pervert judgment, you shall not respect persons, and not take a bribe.”

What really bothers liberals is that the original text of our Constitution is rooted in an even-higher source — the Judge of our judges.

Judge Neil Gorsuch will extract our law from the whims of politicians. His appointment to the Supreme Court is an important step to “make America great again.”



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Opinion: “March for Science” a vanity of the left

Do you have march fatigue yet? The left, apparently, does not, so we’re in for some street theater on Earth Day, April 22, with the so-called March for Science. It’s hard to think of a better way to undermine the public’s faith in science than to stage demonstrations in Washington, D.C., and around the country modeled on the Women&rsquo...
Opinion: The battle against sex trafficking of minors

PHOENIX — Three months ago, State Trooper Jonathan Otto, 33, of the Arizona Department of Public Safety pulled over a car that had caught his attention by traveling 104 miles per hour long after midnight, just south of Kingman. He smelled marijuana in the car. It was driven by a man with an adult female wearing only lingerie. Their passenger...
Opinion: Turns out Alex Jones was only pretending to be a madman

So it turns out Alex Jones was only kidding. That time the radio host and ringmaster of the “Infowars” website said the government brought Ebola into the country to terrorize us? That time he said a Beyonce video was created to start a new civil war, that time he wished gang rape on Jennifer Lopez, those times he suggested the Oklahoma...
Opinion: Why we see such violent suppression of speech at our colleges
Opinion: Why we see such violent suppression of speech at our colleges

Had you remained deceived about the ubiquity of open discourse on America’s college campuses, recent weeks should have set you right. At Claremont McKenna College in California, protesters two weeks ago physically blocked the entrance to a building where the conservative author Heather MacDonald was to speak. MacDonald has criticized what she...
Opinion: Refreshing outbreak of democracy in 6th district
Opinion: Refreshing outbreak of democracy in 6th district

Whatever the outcome of the 6th District race, democracy wins. Sadly, the June 20 race is kind of a unicorn. It’s the rarest of rare because it actually offers a choice between truly competing visions of America. Generally, congressional races feature contests only between moderates and the more feral extremes of their parties. This leads to...
More Stories