Michael Gaynor
President Obama and the activist judge threat: beware
FacebookTwitter
By Michael Gaynor
February 3, 2009

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

President Obama took an oath to uphold the United States Constitution when he was inaugurated as the 44th President of the United States.

But the record shows that President Obama is inclined to try to change America and its Constitution by putting judicial activists on the bench.

Americans don't want that kind of change and must be alert to the danger.

Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor, reported the good news about the position of the American people in "Poll Shows Americans Wary About President Obama Appointing Activist Judges" (www.lifenews.com/nat4808.html).

Mr. Ertelt:

"For the pro-life movement, one of the biggest ramifications of the 2008 presidential election is a pro-abortion president who will appoint Supreme Court judges who will keep virtually unlimited abortions in place for decades longer. Now, a new poll suggests Americans are wary of such activist judges.

"Americans have long been concerned about judges making up the law from the bench, as the high court did in 1973 when it allowed abortion on demand via the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions.

"Anyone who is curious about the attitude Americans have about President Barack Obama and his potential ability to choose one or more high court judges need only to review a new Rasmussen survey.

"The result of the national telephone poll shows nearly two-thirds of voters, 64 percent, say U.S. Supreme Court decisions should be based on what is written in the Constitution.

"Rasmussen found that view regardless of party affiliation, with 79% of Republicans, 64% of unaffiliated voters and 52% of Democrats taking that view.

"But only 35 percent of those surveyed believe Obama shares that view.

"In fact, during the presidential campaign, Obama advanced a judicial activist philosophy and said judges should decide cases based on their own 'deepest values,' 'core concerns,' and 'the depth and breadth of [their] empathy.' "For Obama, 'the critical ingredient is supplied by what is in the judge's heart' — not what is in the text, principles, and history of our Constitution and other laws.

"The Rasmussen findings match up well with the results of a November 2008 poll from the Polling Company, which found that, regardless of which presidential candidate they supported, voters favor judicial restraint by more than three to one.

"Some 70 percent of voters said they prefer a president to nominate judges who 'will interpret and apply the law as it is written and not take into account their own viewpoints and experiences.' Only 22 percent shared Obama's view on activist judges.

"Wendy Long, the chief counsel for the Judicial Confirmation Network, told LifeNews.com that it is up to members of the Senate to make sure judicial activists don't get confirmed to the Supreme Court.

"'President Obama's unprecedented call for judicial activism must be met with an unprecedented level of Senate scrutiny,' she said.

"'For every nominee, there should be a presumption that he would — as President Obama has told us he prefers — decide cases based on his personal views,' she said. 'It should be up to each individual nominee to rebut the presumption and to prove that he would rule on the basis of what the law actually provides, as two-thirds of Americans believe judges should.'"

Mrs. Long issued the following open memorandum titled "Rasmussen Poll Shows U.S. Voters Disagree with Obama on Court":

"Anyone who wonders if American voters agree with President Obama's criteria for picking Supreme Court Justices should take a look at the results of a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

"The Rasmussen survey shows that nearly two-thirds of U.S. voters (64%) say U.S. Supreme Court decisions should be based on what is written in the Constitution, but only 35% think that President Obama shares that view.

"The Rasmussen findings are extremely close to the findings in a November 2008 nationwide survey of actual voters by The Polling Company, which found that regardless of whether they voted for Obama or McCain in the presidential race, voters favor judicial restraint by more than 3 to 1. A full 70% of voters said they prefer a President to nominate Justices to the Supreme Court and judges to the federal courts who 'will interpret and apply the law as it is written and not take into account their own viewpoints and experiences.' Only 22% thought that judges should, as President Obama urges, 'take into account their own viewpoints and experience'" in deciding cases.

"Rasmussen found that regardless of party affiliation, Americans believe that Supreme Court rulings should be based on what is in the written Constitution: 79% of Republicans think so, as do 64% of unaffiliated voters and 52% of Democrats.

"The U.S. Senate will have the responsibility of evaluating and voting on President Obama's judicial nominees. President Obama has advanced the most radical judicial activist philosophy of any president in American history. He said that judges should decide cases based on their own 'deepest values,' 'core concerns,' and 'the depth and breadth of [their] empathy.' According to President Obama, 'the critical ingredient is supplied by what is in the judge's heart' — not what is in the text, principles, and history of our Constitution and other laws.

"President Obama's unprecedented call for judicial activism must be met with an unprecedented level of Senate scrutiny. For every nominee, there should be a presumption that he would — as President Obama has told us he prefers — decide cases based on his personal views. It should be up to each individual nominee to rebut the presumption and to prove that he would rule on the basis of what the law actually provides, as two-thirds of Americans believe judges should."

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

© Michael Gaynor

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Michael Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member... (more)

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Michael Gaynor: Click here

More by this author

June 18, 2024
Who Will Make the Finals and Win the Upcoming Presidential Race?


August 7, 2023
Elections can be 'stolen' in many ways, and the 2020 U.S. presidential election is a 'perfect' example


April 11, 2023
'Politics ain't beanbag,' but investigation and prosecution of Donald Trump by rabid partisans must stop


January 16, 2023
Perhaps learning why the Pearl Harbor attack was a surprise in Hawaii but not in Washington can help us appreciate and learn from other federal government mistakes and move forward wisely


November 4, 2022
Free True the Vote's Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips


October 3, 2022
Who Sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines?


August 13, 2022
Mar-a-Lago raid shows Trump derangement syndrome has fortuitously worsened


July 5, 2022
From the Warren Court to Roberts Court to Thomas Court


May 21, 2022
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been barred from receiving Holy Communion at last


November 19, 2021
Justice ultimately prevailed in the Kyle Rittenhouse case


More articles

 

Stephen Stone
HAPPY EASTER: A message to all who love our country and want to help save it

Stephen Stone
The most egregious lies Evan McMullin and the media have told about Sen. Mike Lee

Siena Hoefling
Protect the Children: Update with VIDEO

Stephen Stone
FLASHBACK to 2020: Dems' fake claim that Trump and Utah congressional hopeful Burgess Owens want 'renewed nuclear testing' blows up when examined

Cherie Zaslawsky
Two shooters, one location!

Frank Louis
Just what part of this is everyone missing? Say it ain’t so Joe.

Linda Goudsmit
CHAPTER 28: Pantheism, Gnosticism, and Marxism

Victor Sharpe
A two-state solution – but on both sides of the River Jordan

Jerry Newcombe
Providence and America

Cherie Zaslawsky
The shot heard 'round the world': Once & future President Donald J. Trump miraculously survives assassination attempt!

Tom DeWeese
The dangerous delusion of Biden and world leaders of transition to ‘just electricity’

Frank Louis
A thought (or two) on the Republican Platform 2024

Robert Meyer
Competing religious claims

Cliff Kincaid
The next assassination attempt

Pete Riehm
America needs unity, but also accountability

Ronald R. Cherry
The Secret Service
  More columns

Cartoons


Click for full cartoon
More cartoons

Columnists

Matt C. Abbott
Chris Adamo
Russ J. Alan
Bonnie Alba
Chuck Baldwin
Kevin J. Banet
J. Matt Barber
Fr. Tom Bartolomeo
. . .
[See more]

Sister sites