Senator McCain on Judges

During a visit to Wake Forest University yesterday, Presidential nominee Senator John McCain gave a speech on the disarray of the U.S. courts and about the kinds of judges that he pledges to nominate, should he win the Presidency.

The status of the Supreme Court, and the status of the courts around the country, is of critical importance to the pro-life movement—and vital to the selection of our next Commander-in-Chief.

Currently, there are six Supreme Court judges over the age of 70. With lifetime appointments, there may be an opportunity to replace some of them in the next administration—likely two or three.

As it currently stands, the Supreme Court is relatively split with four conservative judges, four liberal judges, and one judge who leans toward the center. Of the six judges over the age of 70—likely to retire—four of them are liberal judges.

Why is this important? Our next President may have the opportunity to nominate a Supreme Court Justice to sway the bench—making it more liberal or conservative. As an opponent of Roe vs. Wade, this is an important opportunity.

During his speech at Wake Forest, Senator McCain expressed his intent to nominate “strict constructionists” (strict constructionists favor a strict reading of the Constitution, especially of the elastic clause, in order to limit the powers of the central government.) He told the crown that, “...the duties and boundaries of the Constitution are not just a set of helpful suggestions. They are not just guidelines to be observed when it’s convenient and loosely interpreted when it isn’t.”

Frustrated by the “presumption” of federal judges to resolve policy questions “that should be decided democratically,” McCain pledged to nominate judges in the mold of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and Chief Justice John Roberts.

He went on to say, “In federal and state courts … there are still men and women who understand the proper role of our judiciary. And I intend to find them and promote them … My nominees will understand that there are clear limits to the scope of judicial power.”

In the case of Roe vs. Wade, the court has already sided in the favor of liberals. The hopes of many liberals is to continue the tradition of nominating judicial activists to legislative from the bench on social issues that have the power to change America, and not for the better. It was done in 1973, when most laws against abortion in the United States were found to violate a constitutional right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.