Jonah Goldberg on Harriet Miers

Ken AshfordRight Wing Punditry/Idiocy, Supreme CourtLeave a Comment

This is what Jonah Goldberg at the Corner is saying:

Dobson was on Fox last night defending Miers on the grounds she’s an evangelical Christian. It seems entirely possible and plausible to me that Bush had this as much in his mind as her inner-circle status.

Well, I don’t know how true this is.  She’s religious, but evangelical?  But fine.  I’ll go with the premise.

Evangelical Justices can be trusted to vote the right way because they are, well, evangelicals — or at least that seems to be the desired subtext.

Query "the right way".  Don’t we want justices who will vote according to their interpretation of the Constitution — even if we disagree about how exactly the Constitution should be interpreted? 

Is Jonah saying that evangelical justices are more likely to follow the Constitution than non-evangelicals?  Or is he saying (as I suspect) that evangelicals will follow something other than the Constitution, i.e., the Gospels? 

And if it is the latter, isn’t that the very definition of judicial activism?

I don’t have a problem with much of this logic in the abstract. Certainly, an evangelical Christian has as much right to a seat on the Court as anybody else.

Ummmm, yes.  But we’re not talking about who has a "right" to be on the Court.  The issue who is BEST for the Court?.

Still, I will agree that his last statement is true.  But THIS is also true:  "Certainly, a NASCAR fan has as much right to a seat on the Court as anybody else."

And, contrary to those who despise "polarization," I think polarization is a two way street. Democrats are just plain stupid when they decide to portray evangelicals as some sort of semi-demonic group to get worked-up over. If nominating an evangelical pushes Democratic buttons, shame on the Democrats for having their buttons pushable on such a thing.

Right.  And now you know why.  You want a justice who will vote based on her religious bent — a judicial activist.

No, my only real objection is that she doesn’t seem to be overwhelmingly qualified for the job. Surely, there are more qualified evangelical judicial conservatives out there, including female ones.

I’m sure there are more qualified NASCAR-fan justices out there, even conservatives, even conservative women.  But being a NASCAR fan — or an evangelical — should be irrelevant to anyone interested in the appointment of judges who will follow the law (man’s law, not the Gospels).