The Right Coast
February 13, 2006
The Legal Elite at Work: It Sure Ain't Pretty
By Mike Rappaport
Here is how it works. Justice Stephen Breyer writes a book defending nonoriginalism. As I have written in my review of the book here, I think the book is dishonest and weak. In particular, it portrays its position of finding any meaning Breyer wants to in the Constitution as an exercise of judicial restraint.
The New York Times reviews the book. Who do they assign to do it? Kathleen Sullivan, former Dean of the Stanford Law School and a reliable partisan voice for liberal activism. And what does Sullivan say? She simply repeats the arguments of the book, including that Justice Breyer is really a practitioner of judicial restraint.
Any criticisms of the book, Kathleen? None she thought fit to mention. Here is one she left out: Breyer spends the whole book talking about how one should interpret the Constitution to further political participation and uses that to justify his decisions. Yet, Breyer wrote the Court's decision stating that the Constitution protects partial birth abortions. No political liberty implicated there, neither for the mothers or the fetuses. Yet, Breyer says nothing about it, and Sullivan of course ignores it as well.
One might ask how Sullivan or Breyer can face themselves, but of course we know the answer: They will do anything to justify reading in their favored rights into the Constitution, especially the right to abortion.
This is corruption.