Leading With the Women

If war breaks out in the Senate over judicial nominations, the initial battle is likely to center on two women, Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown. Republicans seem to think that those nominees will come off as so likeable that Democrats will be forced to back down from their threats of a filibuster. But when the American public looks beyond the photo-op, it will be clear why these women do not belong on the federal bench. Both have records of kowtowing to big business and showing contempt for ordinary people who are the victims of injustice.

Of course, it will be said this represents an unacceptable litmus test of these judges' political positions.

Owens certainly gives a good impression of a corporate 'bot. Anyone who sets the rights of a legal fiction above those of flesh and blood humans is not my friend.

And Justice Brown

...is an outspoken supporter of a radical movement to take constitutional law back to before 1937...

Yeah, that quote is kind of tight, but if you read the editorial (as you should) you'll see I've lost no context. You may even feel I'm being kind by focusing so tightly on this single point.

I focus, though, because it is irrefutable proof Justice Brown has no respect for legal and judicial precedent. And this is a fact: without that respect, the rule of law is impossible. I don't know how Brown got the position she currently has.

I certainly don't want her voting with Justice Thomas, who is known to have no respect for stare decisis...an attitude an activist judge would need. That's the sort of thing that should disqualify you for the bench.