Politics Is Okay In The Courtroom — As Long As It’s The Right Kind of Politics
October 1, 2012
Gavel Grab toots Jeffrey Toobin’s complaint that neither President Obama nor Mitt Romney has discussed Supreme Court appointments on the campaign trail. Say Toobin: “With a little more than a month to go, it’s not too late to ask the candidates to take a stand on their plans for the court … there are few more important things to know about our current and future presidents.”
Toobin is right, of course. Voters have every right to know what kind of justice we’re likely to get under a second Obama or first Romney administration. But isn’t this exactly the kind of politicking the Gavel Grabbers argue has no place in choosing judges? Either that or Justice at Stake doesn’t really care about keeping politics out of the courtroom – as long as it’s the right kind of politics.
As if to prove my point, here’s another post attacking the Republican Party of Florida for coming out against the retention of three state Supreme Court justices. A former Florida justice accused the GOP of doing “real damage to an impartial judiciary.” In what can only be generously described as a momentary fit of hysteria, a commentator compared the move to “erasing the separation of powers.”
Well! If simply opposing the retention of three justices amounts to erasing the separation of powers, I guess discussing in detail the kind of judges a president (or governor for that matter) would appoint represents a clear and present danger to the future of the Republic. Can we finally drop the self-righteous preening by the “merit” selection crowd and just admit they are in this fight to get more liberal judges appointed to the bench?
