The courts: ‘People of faith’ vs. the Democrats

Now it's a holy war, said Michelle Goldberg in Salon.com. Galvanized by the passions in the Terri Schiavo case, many leading Republicans have begun casting the battle over America's courts as a collision between soulless secularists and 'œpeople of faith.' Hundreds of conservative Christians recently gathered in Washington for a conference entitled 'œConfronting the Judicial War on Faith,' attended by a host of mainstream Republicans, including Missouri congressman Todd Akin and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. The conference organizer, the Rev. Rick Scarborough, set the tone by warning, 'œAn atmosphere of atheism is being forced upon us by the courts.' Conservative constitutional lawyer Edwin Vieira raised the stakes by personally attacking Supreme Court Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy for relying on 'œMarxist, Leninist, Satanic principles drawn from foreign law.'

That was just the beginning, said Richard Cohen in The Washington Post. The Family Research Council, a major evangelical group, followed up with a second major rally targeting the nation's 'œliberal judges.' The event's organizers insist that Democrats have used filibusters to block Bush's most extreme judicial appointments for one reason'”the nominees were 'œpeople of faith.' But what does the term 'œfaith' really mean to these angry evangelicals? Does the term include devout 'œMuslims with several wives' or 'œHindus with several deities'? What about pro-choice Methodists such as Hillary Clinton, or a liberal Catholic like Ted Kennedy? In the battle over the courts, 'œfaith,' obviously, has come to mean conservative Christianity and, perhaps, Orthodox Judaism. 'œAll others need not apply.'

It's the Democrats, not conservatives, who have a religious litmus test for judges, said Andrew C. McCarthy in National Review Online. Most of the Bush nominees the Democrats have blocked are Christian evangelicals and Catholics, and that's no accident. In recent decades, secular judges have changed 'œthe fundamental nature of our republic' by legalizing abortion, homosexuality, and gay marriage, without the consent of the public. Conservatives are finally rising up against this abuse of power. But the liberal media is aghast, insisting that any criticism of the imperial judiciary 'œis akin to Wahhabi-style holy war.' Funny'”I don't remember the left being so concerned about attacks on 'œjudicial independence after the Supreme Court decided Bush v. Gore.'

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Liberals, in fact, are now planning their own assault on the courts, said John Hinderaker in The Weekly Standard. At a conference at Yale last week, leftist law professors set their agenda for the next two decades'”and their goals were truly astonishing. New 'œrights' must be found or added to the Constitution, participants said, so that every American is guaranteed a home, government-funded child care, and an $80,000 handout to eliminate poverty, funded by the estate tax. 'œPolitical rights enshrined in the Constitution,' one participant said, 'œare inadequate.' Is there any wonder that conservatives are rallying to reject such judicial activism and support President Bush's nominees? 'œThe stakes couldn't be higher.'

The New York Times