Huge Dem Opportunity in Justice Stevens Resignation

“When conservatives like Bork treat rights as islands surrounded by a sea of government powers, they precisely reverse the view of the Founders as enshrined in the Constitution, wherein government powers are limited and specified and rendered as islands surrounded by a sea of individual rights.”

– Stephen Macedo

The retirement of Associate Justice John Paul Stevens sets up a battle over President Obama’s new Court appointee putting on display clear differences between the two major political parties.

It’s a battle that favors Democrats and progressives against the corporatist, anti-liberty Republican Party and Tea Party. Democracy versus feudalism.

Unless you are a person who is a corporation-person, the GOP is takes a dim view of the rights and liberties of American citizens and the rule of law.

I’m going to borrow from a column last May on the nomination of Justice Sotomonyer.

Republicans see Obama’s nomination of … anyone … for Justice Stevens’ seat as outrageous, ultra-liberal, divisive, activist, pick any negative adjective.

The merits of Obama’s choice are irrelevant. Facts, law, intellect, these things don’t matter. Republicans want to attack anything that is not Republican.

Obama need not fear the Republican attack machine. Or be cowed into nominating someone who is only sort of into the rule of law and protecting liberties.

He should appoint Diane Wood, Joel Rogers, or Kathleen Sullivan.

Obama ought to antagonize and in effect declare war with the GOP slime machine.

It doesn’t matter; Republicans are dogmatic bad actors. So stick up for liberty and intellect and have some fun.

Some excellent works on Supreme Court fights and rightwing judicial dogma: The New Right v. the Constitutionby Stephen Macedo and Battle for Justice: How the Bork Nomination Shook America by Ethan Bronner.

As Ed Kilgore notes, it’s Game On.

So it’s official: Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens is retiring, effective at the end of the current Court term, which means a new Justice needs to be confirmed before the October term convenes.

As I noted when Stevens’ retirement became likely, there are two ways Democrats can react to this news.

We can go through the certain Court fight ahead in a half-hearted and distracted way, hoping to get back to ‘real’ issues like financial reform. Or we can take advantage of the opportunity a Court fight presents to expose the extraordinary radicalism of the contemporary conservative movement and its captives in the GOP, best illustrated by its views on the Constitution.

An aggressive and proactive strategy for this fight is in my opinion the right way to go; it will help raise the stakes for the midterm elections for lukewarm Democratic voters, while also casting the choice in November as one between two futures rather than a referendum on a very unpopular status quo in Washington.

So let’s get the game on!