Thursday, July 28, 2005
SCOTUS blogging
Much is being made about his Catholicism and there were Senator Durbin's remarks, or question, which purportedly wondered whether Roberts's Catholicism would "get in the way" of his judicial decisions.
Here's the inane part of this entire discussion. It's not as though Roberts is the first Catholic to be appointed to the Supreme Court. I tried to get a full historical list of SCOTUS Catholics. I couldn't find one. All I could find was that there are today 3 on the Court: Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy. I also found that William Brennan, a noted liberal judge, was recently on the SC. Finally, I found that the first Catholic justice was named in...1836!.
Listen, it's sufficiently offensive that in our supposedly tolerant country, whenever there's the possibility of a "first" - first black, first hispanic, first jew, first woman, first mormon, blah blah blah - it's written about as though a huge asteroid might be hitting the planet.
But there have been umpty ump Catholics who have operated just fine on the SCOTUS. Since 1836! We've had a Catholic president. Can we please get over ourselves? It's absurd. And I'm sorry, if anybody thinks it isn't a form of prejudice to say they mistrust someone born and yes, practicing, a particular religion, then that person is deluding themselves. What's Roberts going to say in answer to the question? It's offensive.
I have little sense as to whether this fellow will be a great SCOTUS justice or not. His credentials are as good as they get, however. He seems like a solid citizen. Ask the questions in the senate that must be asked. But leave his religion alone. It's a toxic topic to debate and antithetical to quintessentially American principles of religious tolerance.
2 Comments:
By 
Cardinalpark, at
Thu Jul 28, 08:45:00 PM:
Cass:
To your point, it used to be that you didn't have to be a lawyer to be a judge on the SCOTUS -- way back when of course. But that was before the lawyer's union took over...
Just bein' modest is all.
And you're right, the Constitution is explicit on the no religious test bit. Of course, I don't think Durbin read the Constitution. Come to think of it, I wonder if he can read...
By Greg, at
Sun Jul 31, 12:45:00 AM:
Echoing somewhat Cassandra's doubts about Little Dickie Durbin... Of course Robert's Catholicism won't get in the way of his judicial decisions. My proof? Idiocy hasn't gotten in Little Dickie's way of being a Senator.
