death penalty news

August 11, 2005


USA:

Roberts and death penalty

For many years now, the U.S. Supreme Court has 
been used as the political playground of 
activists who could never get their causes 
approved by a popular vote of the people or through the legislative process.

In 1973, activists got their way when the court 
struck down popular legal restrictions on abortion in most states.

In 1996 in the Romer v. Evans ruling, the court 
overturned a provision of the Colorado 
constitution approved by voters in the state that 
denied special group rights on the basis of 
sexual proclivities. Later, in 2003, in the 
Lawrence v. Texas ruling, the court struck down 
laws against sodomy across the United States.

What's the next big activist cause for this activist court?

I'll tell you. It will be the death penalty. Remember where you read it first.

There are already rumblings within the court. 
Over the weekend, Justice John Paul Stevens, 85, 
let the world know he thinks it's time for the 
high priests in black robes to rule from on high about capital punishment.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg has made similar noises in the past.

And now we find out that Judge John Roberts, 
nominated to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, not 
only did pro bono legal work to support the 
homosexual activists in the Romer case, he also 
provided some 25 hours of free legal time on 
behalf John Ferguson, a Florida death-row inmate who killed eight people.

Ferguson, 56, was a triggerman in the murders of 
eight people in two separate, apparently 
drug-related shootings. His accomplices, Beauford 
J. White and Marvin Francois, have already been 
executed, but Ferguson's appeals have continued 
based on claims he is mentally ill.

The White House explains Roberts took the Romer 
case and the Ferguson case because his firm asked him to do so.

Let me ask you: Would you work on behalf of the 
most historic legal attack on Judeo-Christian 
sexual moral values if your company asked you to 
do so? Would you trust to a lifetime Supreme 
Court appointment a man who did so eagerly?

Would you help craft legal arguments to protect 
the life of a convicted mass murderer because 
your company asked you to do so? Would you trust 
to a lifetime Supreme Court appointment a man who did so without hesitation?

I wouldn't. I don't. And I suspect most Americans 
feel the same way ? even those at significantly 
lower pay grades than Judge Roberts and with a 
lot more to lose by a taking principled, moral position.

We don't know much about where Roberts stands on 
the key issues facing America. He's a blank slate 
? much like David Souter and Anthony Kennedy 
were. He has been careful not to write or say 
much publicly that would give the American people a clue about his worldview.

He's the stealth Supreme Court nominee George W. Bush was apparently seeking.

Conservative activists threw their confirmation 
support to him early and don't want to look 
foolish changing their minds now that the facts are beginning to raise doubts.

Liberal activists continue to raise questions, as 
they always will about any Republican 
presidential appointment. But, I am predicting 
they will fall in line now they smell another 
Souter or Kennedy within their grasp.

What we desperately need on the court are several 
more Antonin Scalias or Clarence Thomases. That's 
what George W. Bush promised those who supported him in 2000 and 2004.

What he has delivered instead is a nominee who 
will get overwhelming support by the U.S. Senate. 
Not one Republican will stand in his way and 
most, if not all, Democrats will soon jump on the bandwagon.

And the political activists who misuse the courts 
to force their agenda down the throats of the 
American people and at the expense of the 
Constitution will be the big winners once again.

(Joseph Farah is founder, editor and chief 
executive officer of WND and a nationally 
syndicated radio talk-show host. He is also the 
founder of WND Books. In addition to his daily 
column in WND, he writes a nationally syndicated 
weekly column available to U.S. newspapers through Creators Syndicate.)

(source: Between the Lines column, WorldNetDaily)

Reply via email to