During the Saddleback Forum, held this past August at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, CA, Barack Obama was asked which Supreme Court members he would not have nominated if he were President. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas were the two he singled out. It just so happens that they are the two most conservative Supreme Court justices on the high court.
Obama’s response was telling. It reveals what he thinks of the Constitution and the original intent of our Constitutional Republic -- as created by the founding fathers. Like most Democrats, Obama buys into the ridiculous notion that our Constitution is a “living document” that changes and evolves over time. For this reason, liberal activists like Barack Obama believe holding to the original intent of the founding fathers is neither necessary nor realistic.
Yet, the Constitution itself does not make reference to a living document that changes over time. The very reason the founders placed no term limits for judges within the Constitution was to allow for an unchanging judicial precedent to stand the test of time. In fact, the founders made it so difficult to change the Constitution that there have only been seventeen amendments made since the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791.
Let’s think about what it takes to change the Constitution. It takes a super majority of two-thirds of both houses of Congress, and a super majority of three-fourths of the state legislatures to pass an amendment to the Constitution; this must be done in a way that does not undermine the foundation of the Constitution itself. This is such a difficult task to accomplish that it is easy to see that the founders intended for the Constitution to change as little as possible. Their own writings say as much.
Recommended
This leads to the Democrat party and Barack Obama. In full defiance of the founders, the Constitution and the inalienable rights given to us by our Creator, the Democrats and Obama think it is their job to re-write the Constitution by way of judicial fiat. Remember, Obama has already said he would not have placed Justices Scalia and Thomas on the Supreme Court. He even voted against confirming Justice John Roberts and Samuel Alito. With a record like this, Barack Obama will most certainly nominate more liberal activist judges to the supreme and federal courts.
Right now, the Democrats in the Senate are salivating at the opportunity to have Obama as President with a larger Senate majority -- a larger Senate majority that will confirm as many as three Obama nominated Supreme Court judges, and as many as 100 Obama nominated federal judges.
Think of the havoc these liberal activists will thrust upon the American people. Our Constitutional liberties have been placed in jeopardy by the existing liberal judges thus far. One hundred more on the federal courts and three more on the Supreme Court will make the Kelo vs. New London case look tame. This explains why the Democrat controlled Senate is holding up a significant number of President Bush’s judicial nominees. They are hoping to fill those vacancies with Barack Obama’s potential nominees.
During the last two years of President Bush’s term in office, only 10 of his Circuit Court nominations have been confirmed. During President Clinton’s last two years in office, 15 of his Circuit Court nominations were confirmed. Jimmy Carter had 44 of his nominations confirmed in his last two years in office.
The average number of days for these judges to be confirmed is also staggering. President Bush’s Circuit Court nominations have had to wait an average of 350 days to be confirmed. Bill Clinton’s Circuit Court nominees had to wait an average of 238 days to be confirmed. Jimmy Carter’s judicial nominations had to wait 69 days on average.
Can we see the writing on the wall? Allowing Barack Obama to become president, along with a greater Democrat majority in the Senate, will have serious ramifications. The Obama court nominees, once confirmed, will dramatically increase their writing law from the bench – in obvious violation of their Constitutional powers.
Just this past year, the Supreme Court upheld the right to keep and bear arms by a meager 5-4 decision. All nine justices should have voted in favor of upholding the second amendment, but four did not. That means “we the people” are only one Supreme Court judge away from losing the right to defend our life, liberty and property.
With Barack Obama’s liberal activist judges on the Supreme Court, we could see a drastic rewriting of the second amendment. By judicial decree, a Barack Obama appointed Supreme Court can easily redefine the meaning of marriage as state courts have done, in full defiance of the will of the American people. Obama has already stated that he desires to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
This is serious business. Barack Obama’s radical views will more than likely manifest themselves through his judicial appointments. It is safe to say that electing Barack Obama as president is literally courting disaster.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member