When judges place ideology above the Constitution and our laws, Democracy suffers
NEWS RELEASE from MORALITY IN MEDIA, Inc.
New York (6/25/01) – The Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts has scheduled a hearing for June 26, 2001, “to examine concerns of ideology relative to the judicial nominations of 2001.”
Morality in Media President Robert Peters had the following statement concerning the subject of the hearing:
“At Morality in Media we are very aware that when judges place their ideology and policy preferences above the United States Constitution, above the rule of law, the health of our Democracy suffers.
“One of the clearest examples of the damage caused by the bending and breaking of the judicial oath of office is in the continuing, slow distortion of the First Amendment. It was added to the Constitution in 1791 to protect the right of the people to criticize the government, speak freely on the issues of the day, and to exercise their religion freely, without interference from the government or a government-backed church. We now see the First Amendment increasingly misused as a protector of obscenity and indecency. We see its establishment clause used to suppress religious liberty.
“Does the personal ideology of a nominee for judicial office matter? Not necessarily. But a nominee must be able to put aside personal ideology and follow the Constitution and the statutes written by others. The fairness and integrity of a nominee matter. A nominee’s competence matters. A nominee’s basic humility in the shadow of America’s great founding documents matters.
“In short, America does not need judges who use their judicial powers to enact ACLU or Libertarian agendas. America needs qualified, fair, judges who wisely apply the law, instead of overturning valid lawsthey personally disapprove of or inventing new rights out of whole cloth.”
Author: Morality in Media 06/25/2001