Bork For Supreme Court
by Jeff Crouere

In an interview prior to his election in 2000, George W. Bush commented that his favorite Supreme Court Justices were Anton Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Now he has chosen John Roberts to replace Sandra Day O’Connor and he looks like a good conservative choice. On the other hand, he has very little in his record to prove it. The fact this was apparently one of the reasons he was chosen is probably good politics but it brings back uneasy memories of when George Bush senior nominated David Souter. That did not turn out very well.

The ideological balance of the court will be determined by this and the next Supreme Court justice. I had earlier expressed concern that President Bush might choose a liberal in disguise with a scant track record like Souter who has disappointed conservatives more than any other Supreme Court Justice. Or, I asked, will he take the heat, throw caution to the wind and nominate a Supreme Court Justice who is obviously faithful to the written words in the U.S. Constitution? Such a jurist would not believe the constitution is a living, breathing document, but one that was crafted by the Founders in a brilliant manner to shape the destiny of this country. In other words, he should be an “originalist,” who will attempt as best as possible to use the original intent of the founders as a guide.

According to a recent Gallup poll, 40% of Americans want the Supreme Court to move in a more conservative direction, while only 30% want the court to become more liberal. Hopefully, Roberts fills the bill. But the next vacancy must be filled by a conservative too. The potential nominee most often mentioned for the second vacancy is Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Many conservatives are unhappy with his track record and are sure he will be another faux conservative, so they have registered their strong disapproval. Gonzales, who has just started his tenure as Attorney General should be allowed to finish that important job. Janice Rogers Brown, who was finally confirmed this spring as an Appeals Court Judge, should be allowed to establish a track record on that significant Court before sending her up.

Who is the most competent person President Bush could nominate for a second vacency? It’s easy, the man with the most experience in the confirmation process. This is the man who has already been through the hearings and who has had his entire history exposed. This skilled jurist earned the wrath of Gregory Peck and Senator Ted Kennedy, an accomplishment of significance. Of course, this man is even responsible for a new word in our vocabulary, “borked.” (Definition: To be roughly treated and then fail a Senate confirmation process) The best possible nominee is easy: Judge Robert H. Bork. He’s tan, rested and ready.

Eighteen years ago Judge Bork went through a confirmation process of the most vicious nature, establishing a new low standard even for Capitol Hill. He survived with his dignity intact, but not a position on the Supreme Court, losing the confirmation fight by a vote of 58-42. Now is the time for President Bush to right that wrong.

No one is more qualified than Judge Bork. He was a law partner at a prestigious firm, taught constitutional law at Yale University, served as Solicitor General and Acting U.S. Attorney General and was a Judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals. In recent years, he has been a best selling author and a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the Hudson Institute. All agree he has an outstanding legal mind, is a brilliant legal scholar and was an accomplished jurist. Unfortunately, liberals in 1987 won the battle and “borked” him in a confirmation process that was more akin to a circus. The Reagan White House was caught flat footed and was in the midst of recovering from the Iran-Contra scandal, so they did not fight fire with fire. They let Chief of Staff Howard Baker, a former Senator, shepherd the process. Tragically, Baker did not allow the Reagan White House to aggressively attack his former Senate colleagues who were acting dishonorably.

In the end, not only did a good man lose his confirmation battle, but the Supreme Court lost and the country lost the services of a brilliant legal mind. In 1987, the liberals could not abide a Supreme Court Judge who actually believed in judicial restraint and did not believe the U.S. Constitution included a right to privacy. In summation, Bork was viewed as too much of a threat to the most cherished liberal Supreme Court decision ever, Roe v. Wade.

Many scholars believe Roe v. Wade was an abomination that needs to be overturned by the Supreme Court as soon as possible. President Bush can make this conservative dream a reality by picking Robert H. Bork as his next Supreme Court nominee. Now is the time for this President to rectify the past injustice. Some will say that Bork is too old, OK, so he is 78, but so what? Ten years of Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Bork is better than 24 years of Sandra Day O’Connor or however many years David Souter eventually serves on the court. If President Bush is committed to picking the best possible Supreme Court nominee, he can choose no one better than Robert H. Bork.

Jeff Crouere is a native of New Orleans, LA and his Louisiana based program, Ringside Politics, airs at 8:30 p.m. Friday and 10:30 p.m. Sunday on WLAE-TV, Channel 32. Visit his website at www.ringsidepolitics.com.

Email the Editor