Judge Roberts Day Four
Judge Roberts blew away the Democratic Senators who attempted to finnagle Roberts into an unfortunate verbal misstep. Yet again, Roberts proved to be their match. According to Senator Durbin, he’s the best nominee he’s ever seen.
I take umbrage with Senator Schumer’s assertion in the hearing today regarding Justices Scalia and Thomas. To say that the distinguised jurists, albeit conservative, are attempting to “turn back a century of progress” through their jurisprudence begs an antecedent question. That is, how does Schumer define “progress”? Does he define it as Supreme Court decisions that adore affirmative action or diversity and substitute their own unelected morality for the judgment of a state’s representative body? Primarily, it seems for Schumer’s questioning of Roberts that “progress” means any decision involving the “right of privacy,” affirmative action, or sustains the Senate’s interpretation of the Commerce Clause in its lawmaking. Schumer’s view of progress is one that rejects the Constitution and places in its stead a dynamic, modernized, and judge-made law which disguises itself as constitutional. Perhaps, Schumer hates Scalia and Thomas so much because they are principled jurists, and principle is not a quality that Schumer seems to hold in as high regard.