Founders' footprints

A line from William Wordsworth gives expression to a sentiment that runs deep in American conservatism: "What we have loved others will love, but we must teach them how." Enlarging the "social realm" has always been perceived as an important task for mature individuals and good citizens. The notion of imbuing the young with sound principles and high standards dates at least to ancient Greece. But not only was it embraced by Plato and Aristotle, there were others, most noteworthy among them being America's Founding Fathers.\nBut such instruction should not emanate from the courts. The current battle over the nomination of Justice John G. Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court revolves around this issue: Are judges, of either a conservative or a liberal philosophy, to interpret or to make the law? Sensible judicial minds will always opt for the former. From this perspective, we know the courts in our land have been poor judicial intellects since the 1960s -- even if they have been superb social activists. The Supreme Court has invented new rights for criminals and put new restrictions on police and prosecutors. It ordered God, prayer and Bible reading out of classrooms. It said pornography was constitutionally protected, making Larry Flynt a First Amendment hero, rather than a sordid felon. \nIt declared abortion a constitutional right and sodomy a constitutionally-protected activity. It abolished term limits on members of Congress voted by state referendums and banned prayer in high schools before special events. It ordered the Ten Commandments out of courthouses. It held, in key affirmative action cases, that discrimination against white students did not infringe upon the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection. \nThis is political gamesmanship of the most sordid sort. Leftist Democrats once held a monopoly of government power. Democrats have a long history of great political power. But since Reagan's 1980 revolution, Republicans have expanded their foothold in "blue" areas and risen in ascendancy. \nAnd so, in a bid to recapture lost influence, Democrats have turned away from the executive and legislative branches of government to their last recourse: the judicial. The reason they will fail is simple: The Founders, in their wisdom, made this usurpation of power hard to execute. As previously stated, these leaders of American political thought believed the social realm to be of great importance. It was not, however, to be manufactured through the courts. It was the task of "the people" to govern themselves through republican government, not judicial supremacy. James Madison, who was the chief intellect behind the Constitution, believed the judicial branch should be the weakest branch in governing affairs. \nA president, elected and re-elected, now occupies the White House with considerable Congressional support. Objectively well-qualified constitutionalists, who have long held the superior argument, can thus prevail in the confirmation fight. The decisions of a self-governing republic such as ours must reside in the people and their representatives. This should be an ideal that wins approval from all sides of the spectrum. It is also by this route that conservatives can begin to take back the court. High time, too.