Unblinding Lady Justice
It was clear from the beginning that Barak Obama had no interest in holding us all to the same standard of law. Speaking to Planned Parenthood Action Fund July 17, 2007 he said,
“I think the Constitution can be interpreted in so many ways. And one way is a cramped and narrow way in which the Constitution and the courts essentially become the rubber stamps of the powerful in society. And then there’s another vision of the Court that says that the courts are the refuge of the powerless. Because oftentimes they can lose in the democratic back and forth.” (Complete transcript here: http://lauraetch.googlepages.com/barackobamabeforeplannedparenthoodaction)
Clearly President Obama (who taught this drivel for 10 years as an Adjunct Professor of Law) believes the law is written to favor the powerful in society against the powerless, and that it is a political construct subject to change depending on who is in power. In this view, it is the role of judges not to interpret the law, but to choose sides when deciding cases.
On the contrary, it is his vision of Constitutional law is what is “cramped and narrow.” American freedom was created because the powerful in England used their inherited and acquired status to enrich themselves by exploiting the poor. The Constitution including the Bill of rights was written and adopted to prevent the powerful from choosing winners by placing specific, negative limitations on the powers of government to exploit individuals. Obama has a problem with the results of freedom under law, so he intends to reinstitute the rule of the powerful and force equality of result. Those in the know call that socialism.
In order to achieve this equality of result, President Obama finds it necessary to promote violation of Constitutional principles. He continues during the same speech,
“…in most Supreme Court decisions, in the overwhelming number of Supreme Court decisions, that’s enough. Good intellect, you read the statute, you look at the case law and most of the time, the law’s pretty clear. Ninety-five percent of the time. Justice Ginsberg, Justice Thomas, Justice Scalia they’re all gonna agree on the outcome.
But it’s those five percent of the cases that really count. And in those five percent of the cases, what you’ve got to look at is—what is in the justice’s heart. What’s their broader vision of what America should be. Justice Roberts said he saw himself just as an umpire but the issues that come before the Court are not sport, they’re life and death. And we need somebody who’s got the heart—the empathy—to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor or African-American or gay or disabled or old—and that’s the criteria by which I’ll be selecting my judges. Alright?”
What he is saying is that judges must be willing to ignore the law and the Constitution and vote with their heart. There are times the judges must not apply the law. He wants us held to different standards. They are to remove the blindfold and choose winners based on their gender, race, ethnic background, sexual desires, skin color, and the like. Therefore it is critical to have judges whose disposition of heart is identical with Obama’s rather than the Constitution. Those who can be counted on to ignore the law, and choose winners and losers by different criteria.
A “gay” judge would understand how a sexually confused teen might feel, and therefore not apply penalty against him for battering someone who mocks him. A “Latina” judge would understand how a Latina who shoots her boss might be frustrated at lack of promotion, and be found not guilty be reason of being a Latina.
In keeping with his socialist goals, he has nominated Sonia Sotomayor who has already committed herself to the idea of removing the blindfold because she doesn’t believe the law is sufficient. She must be free to choose the winners and losers, and it’s hard when you can’t see. Mr. Obama chose her because she is committed to this fatal view, not in spite of it.
She has committed herself to the idea that a woman Latina like herself is more likely to produce a good result in a legal decision than a white male. (The white House said this was an off-the-cuff remark, but we now know that she has repeated it over many years in speech after speech.) There can be no question, she believes in racial and gender superiority, so is she guilty of racisism or misandry – man-hatred? Of course, what else could you call it?
She plans to lie when taking the oath for federal Judges,
(“I, [Sonia Sotomayor], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as Justice of the Supreme Court under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”)
She plans to lie, because she is committed to respecting persons, and NOT doing equal right to the poor and rich. Nor is she intending to perform her duties under the Constitution and laws of the United States. On the contrary, she is of the belief that the Constitution will not respect the persons she wants, so she plans to violate it by taking account of the people involved in any case to come before her rather than being blind to who they are and judging on the law alone.
Shamelessly looking at the parties in a legal case, ignoring the law, and personally choosing winners are what this President wants. Peeking on the part of Lady Justice is not only thus permitted, it will now be required.
Those who espouse the concept of a ‘living constitution,’ or a ‘growing constitution’ announce, in essence, that they intend to rule by Aristocratic privilege. The underlying rationale for it is that “we the people” are too stupid to craft, approve, and amend a Constitution by which all subsequent laws must be measured; therefore “the people’s” document – the Constitution – must be ignored. Because of our stupidity, the Aristocrats (who are intrinsically superior) must correct the mistakes of the people.
The Constitution, then, is only an impediment to their task of arranging society the way they personally want it. They reserve to themselves the right to say the Constitution actually doesn’t say what we all know it says; it actually says a bunch of other stuff that only Gnostic Aristocrats can find. They lament that the Constitution impedes the agenda they want to institute which, of course, it was written to do. Don’t hold your breath waiting for President Obama or his newly nominated Supreme Court Justice to announce that they hate Constitutional limitations on government power and that they intend to ignore them.
The problems associated with ignoring the Constitution and imposing an Aristocracy are too numerous to mention here, but among them:
- Massive constraints on personal freedoms we have enjoyed from the beginning of our Republic
- A downhill path to economic, moral and cultural ruin that can only be overcome at length by citizen uprisings
- Winners and losers chosen by the whim of the powerful completely reversing the founding principles on which our Republic is based
- Complete confusion regarding what a given person can expect before the law
Be careful what you support! Be careful what powers you cede to government! Some day Aristocrats with a view of what constitutes a just society much different from yours may come to power. This new Aristocracy may deem Jews to be less than human, that homosexuality is a blight to be eradicated; or that the Christian religion and free speech must be abolished for the good of the demos; or that children up to age three and over the age of seventy are not Constitutional persons and may be killed without penalty because they cost too much to keep healthy. But it’s okay, because “empathy” not law is the new basis for deciding legal cases.
Be careful about what powers you abandon to government in order to achieve temporary advantage! The Constitution calls the rights and powers you hold “unalienable” – you can’t sell them, or even give them away, but President Obama and the progressives in the Democrat Party are taking them away from you. Unless we stop this unconstitutional power grab, going down Obama Road will ultimately lead to new Pilgrims of all colors having to leave our shores in search of another place to begin the process of creating human freedom and equality under the law once again.
“But take degree away, untune that string,
And hark what discord follows. Each thing meets
In mere oppugnancy…
Force should be right, or rather, right and wrong
Should lose their names, and so should justice too!
Then every thing includes itself in power,
Power into will, will into appetite,
And appetite, an universal wolf
(So doubly seconded with will and power),
Must make perforce an universal prey,
And at last eat up himself.”
Shakespeare, Ulysses, Troilus and Cressida, Act I Scene III lines 109-124