When a state court violates the election laws passed by its state legislature -- whether in New Jersey this year or in Florida two years ago -- the mainstream media backs them up, when this serves the political causes favored by journalists, who vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. Any criticism of such courts is deplored as an attack on the independent judiciary and the rule of law.
But when the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Florida Supreme Court in 2000 and restored the law passed by the Florida legislature, the media outcry was loud and long. It was called "interference" by the High Court, when in fact what the justices did was stop interference by the state court. Maybe the heat that the justices took from the media had something to do with their refusal to carry out their constitutional responsibility this time.
Some are discussing the New Jersey fiasco as if the issue is whether it is "fair" to have one party be able to substitute candidates at the eleventh hour when its current candidate is behind in the polls. That is a legitimate question but whether we have a government of laws, and not of men, is a momentous question.
The New Jersey judicial corruption highlights the importance of electing U.S. senators who will confirm judges who follow the law, not their own political leanings and social visions. The Senate is currently blocking judicial nominees who follow the law, obviously hoping to get judicial Houdinis who will enact the liberal agenda from the bench, when it cannot get enacted in the voting booths.
Voters need to keep that in mind when they go to the polls in a few weeks. In voting for Senate candidates, especially, they are voting on what kind of country we are going to have and what kind of country our children will inherit.