We haven’t heard as much about judicial appointments in this election as we did in 2004. Perhaps the financial crisis has removed that from the front of most voters’ minds, but the Judicial Confirmation Network wants to remind people that the next President will choose more than just an approach to fixing the financial meltdown:
America: land of opportunity — and prosperity. But what made America great is what we stand for: liberty — equality — inalienable rights.
Fixing the economy is crucial. But America’s principles and Constitution are threatened by one more liberal activist vote on the Supreme Court.
Please join Judicial Confirmation Network. Help spread the word: “It takes just one vote.”
The question hasn’t arisen to a top-shelf issue for a couple of reasons. Most people believe the most likely retirements in the next four years will be from two or three of the Supreme Court’s liberal wing, with John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg first and perhaps also Stephen Breyer or David Souter. That makes the issue of SCOTUS appointments a little less acute than in 2004, when we anticipated the departures of conservative William Rehnquist and swing vote Sandra Day O’Connor. If we miss this opportunity, some may figure, it won’t hurt us as it will just maintain the court balance as is.
However, that misses two important points. First, SCOTUS appointments affect court decisions for decades. Missing an opportunity now may mean losing ground to judicial activism for the next 30 years. The issue of judicial activism doesn’t just apply to SCOTUS, either, but also to the district and appellate judges that the next President will select. If Barack Obama stacks these levels with activist jurists, especially younger appointees, a friendly Supreme Court may never happen with or without a Republican in the White House.
JCN will run this ad in Ohio and western Pennylvania, as well as northern West Virginia. Hopefully, this will serve as a timely reminder.