creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
Joseph Farah
Joseph Farah
15 May 2013
To IRS: Apology Not Accepted

To the stunning admission by Barack Obama's Internal Revenue Service that one of the most powerful and feared … Read More.

8 May 2013
Have I Flipped My Lid?

Maybe you're one of those folks wondering if I've become some kind of a religious zealot — with all my … Read More.

1 May 2013
When the Inmates Run the Asylum

I recall reading a novel in 1978 by John Irving called "The World According to Garp." It was a … Read More.

Is Justice Kennedy Finally Waking Up?

Comment

Anthony Kenney has been on the Supreme Court for a long time.

For conservatives who revere the constitutional separation of powers, it's an understatement to say this Ronald Reagan appointee has been a disappointment.

Considered a "swing vote" on the court, he often swings the wrong way. He's something of a switch-hitter — sometimes swinging right and sometimes swinging left depending on who's pitching.

But he made a statement earlier this month that was somewhat encouraging.

Here's what he told reporters in his hometown of Sacramento about the tendency of the court to legislate from the bench: "I think it's a serious problem. A democracy should not be dependent for its major decisions on what nine unelected people from a narrow legal background have to say."

Does he mean what he says?

Has he had an epiphany?

What impact will his expressed view have on upcoming decisions — notably California's Proposition 8 in which voters in that very liberal state rejected same-sex marriage only to see federal courts determine that the definition of marriage has actually been wrong for the last 6,000 years?

Or, how about the Defense of Marriage Act, passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, which is likely to be up for review at the Supreme Court in a matter of days or weeks?

Typically, Supreme Court justices are influenced over time by the cultural pressures of living inside the beltway and a socially radical news media and pop culture. When the media notice these shifts in values and the willingness to scrap the law of the land in favor of personal opinion, they like to write profiles of justices "growing in their office."

"Growing"?

How about capitulating to the winds of social hedonism, hyper-secularism and moral relativism?

That would be more accurate.

The question is whether Kennedy, once considered a "conservative" who respected the rule of law, has begun to swing back to his roots.

It would be a real shocker to the political and cultural establishment if that is that case.

I'm not holding my breath.

One commonsense statement made in his hometown does not a worldview make.

Nevertheless, with Obama entrenched in the White House for another four years, Harry Reid entrenched as the majority leader of the Senate for another two and weakling Republican John Boehner entrenched as House speaker for the next two, Kennedy emerges as an important figure in the direction of the country — perhaps more important than ever before.

Of course, there is another wild card on the court, too.

Chief Justice John Roberts shocked conservatives by affirming the constitutional legitimacy of Obamacare. So when it comes time to imminent Supreme Court decisions on the sanctity of the institution of marriage, it's something of a crapshoot. Both Roberts and Kennedy need to wake up and get it right.

But many court observers are encouraged by Kennedy's words — words that could have been uttered by Ronald Reagan himself or Justice Antonin Scalia or Justice Clarence Thomas or Justice Samuel Alito.

Could the institution of marriage actually be saved by a Supreme Court decision, despite its drift leftward over the years? We will have the answer shortly. It will depend on largely on two men — Roberts and Kennedy.

These decisions are among the most important ever in the history of the Supreme Court.

Of course, even in the best-case scenario, it won't represent the final word. The social activists determined to destroy the institution of marriage will continue their war on morality, the rule of law, common sense and decency. They're in it for the long haul. But America is badly in need of reprieve from the social chaos and madness that has swept the country for the last few decades. Pray the Supreme Court finally gets one right.

To find out more about Joseph Farah and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2013 CREATORS.COM



Comments

1 Comments | Post Comment
Sir;... If it is time for Justice Kennedy to wake up it is time for America to wake up... It is not democracy that is dependent upon the unelected judges; but the non-democracy, partocracy, majority rule we have -could not exist a day without them..
Those people who use their privilages of press of religion, or property to attack civil rights are the worst sorts of criminals... Those people who limited our representation in the House were at best misguided, and at worst, were deliberately trying to sabotage our poor version of democracy... Those people who think majorities are all that is needed to extinguish a right, while their rights are God given and protected by the constitution have the whole idea of government wrong...
Democracy is about offering a concerted defense of Rights, and that government that attacks rights attacks its own people... That is what our government is reduced to; a general attack on rights on behalf of those people with privilages, with government deliberately made unrepresentative legislating on the basis of public opinion and forcing the population to suffer unfairs laws until such time as the Supreme Court can correct them...
Our version of democracy is failing... The partisanship that the Greek tragedian prayed away from Athens has become our commonplace... The limited numbers in the House of Representatives has empowered no one but the parties, and the constant defense of rights we must mount against the government is breaking all the people, and is totally ineffective against the power of privilage...
Sir; the people have no tangible excuse for sticking with this form of government, with the parties and the privilages they protect... We are finding that it is easier to talk of a new government than of defending against the old government... Those people who today spend their savings trying to have government recognize their civil and human rights against the resistence of those with privilage who fear the loss of their privilage are learning a lesson, and all the sooner when their efforts meet with failure...
This government is today worse in every respect than that one we revolted from in England; and the only difference with that people who raised the red white and blue, is that we have not yet been forced by the necessity of our condition to trust each other...I hope that is the end of this exercise; that we learn to give all rights people find necessary that do not show obvious injury to society...
The privilages that divide us over press, church, and property have laid us open to attack, made enemies for us abroad, and invited our enemies to educate themselves at our expense... All civilizations have grown out of conquest, and failed out of their divisions, and we are divided so we can be ruled, and ruled so we can be raped out of our rights...
People do not petition the government for their amusment... The great cost, difficulty, and time involved in a defense of rights demands a great commitment, and reveal a great need... If government cannot show a substancial injury to anyone, they have no reason to forbid any activity, and they have every reason to seek economic and political equality as essential to democracy...The parties are not a privilage granted by the constitution, but the right of free assembly is recognized... If parties exist only for their own power, and the people find it necessary to first move the parties before moving government, than this impediment must be removed because there is in the form of government itself -inertia already in place, and the government should be agile, dynamic, and immediate in response to the needs of the people...
What people feel they need is their right;and no one can express their needs so well as they, and it should not require any sort of a majority to assert a right... Again; Government exists to defend rights, and not attack rights... Those people using a privilage that is for their own protection against the people, playing on the fact that the people must move mountains to have their rights are enemies of the people, and of this nation...
It was always wrong to put so much of religious and economic activity outside of the control of government...No people should have more than equal rights without the ability to show reasonable cause... But equality of rights is a given, the sinequanon of democracy...
Since no one can point to any place in time where the churches have stood united against injustice and for equal civil rights, they have obviously fulfilled their limited and self serving purpose, and should be refused privilage... Property and press can show no general benefit; so their privilages can safely end...Once people stop laying back on their privlages, and toying with everyones human rights, it is possible all will want to add to our general store of rights... Today we are divided over privilages... Privilages are taken as rights and rights are taken by the government... This situation must end...
Thanks ... Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Thu Mar 28, 2013 6:24 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Joseph Farah
May. `13
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Betsy McCaughey
Betsy McCaugheyUpdated 15 May 2013
Ben Shapiro
Ben ShapiroUpdated 15 May 2013
Joseph Farah
Joseph FarahUpdated 15 May 2013

23 May 2012 Good for Franklin Graham!

13 May 2009 Long Live Rush -- And Free Speech

23 Feb 2011 Are 58 Percent of Americans Insane?