America Doesn't Need More Strict Constructionist Judges

In this presidential election year we must consider one of the most far reaching Constitutional responsibilities of the President of the United States: the appointment of federal judges and, ultimately, Supreme Court Justices.

The current crop of Supreme Court Justices, dominated by George Bush's appointees, have ruled with impunity that states can deny minorities, elderly and poor their right to vote. They have ruled that in spite of the Eight Amendment, it is acceptable to execute prisoners in an extremely cruel and painful fashion. They have also ruled that employers can discriminate against women as long as the discrimination is kept secret for the first 6 months. They have ruled that, despite the lack of a regulated militias in this 21st century, high crime era where guns kill almost as many people as heart disease, it is permissible for anyone to have any kind of a gun. This is legislating from the bench in a way that is detrimental to the majority of Americans. However, according to George Bush and John McCain, that form of judicial activism is perfectly acceptable.

The Constitution of the United States was established in 1787, more than 230 years ago. There have been a great many changes in the last 230 years, in society, in culture, in business and in technology. There have been more changes in the last two centuries than in the last two millennia.

Thomas Jefferson suggested that the Constitution should be regularly revisited, and expressed his concern that if it were not, society would crumble. An oligarchy of, by and for "the rich" would arise and increase the public debt for their own enrichment. The middle class would be destroyed and Americans would become mere "automatons of misery." Sound familiar?

The Framers stated in the Preamble of the Constitution the hope "...to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." They tried their best to anticipate the changes that the future would hold. However, they built in two mechanisms to deal with changes they could not anticipate. The process for amending the Constitution of the United States and the Federal Judicial System as established by Article III of the Constitution.

The Judges of the Federal Courts, up to and including the the ultimate court of appeals, the Supreme Court of the United States, are charged with interpreting the law in terms of the Constitution. However, the law and the Constitution do not exist in a vacuum. The law and the Constitution exist within a social, cultural, business and technological framework. People look to the courts to answer how the law applies today to the circumstances they face brought on by those changes.

To apply the law in the same way in the 2008 as it was in the 1787 would work if farmers still plowed a field behind a team of oxen, all products were handcrafted by a single craftsman, wives were the property of their husbands, people still owned slaves and women still washed clothes by the stream with a rock. RIIIGGHHHT!