The Nightmare of an Obama Court

Few things send more chills down the spines of right-to-lifers than the prospect of an Obama-shaped U.S. Supreme Court. As Stuart Taylor writes in the National Journal:

“Among the starkest contrasts between John McCain and Barack Obama is the dramatic difference in their promised approaches to judicial appointments, especially to the closely divided Supreme Court.” This statement should be in bold in everyone’s brain as they consider the presidential election.

In 2009, six of the nine justices will be 70 or older. Should Obama be elected to two terms, he will likely have the ability to replace Stevens, Scalia and Kennedy. A Stevens replacement would be a “clone” of his views that the court can and should legislate from the bench. A Scalia replacement would be a disaster. Kennedy’s replacement would be a solid vote for making law from the bench instead of Kennedy’s propensity to shift from side to side, depending on the issue.

If you really want to shiver, consider the possibility of Hillary Clinton on the court.

Obama has said that “most of the time” conservative and liberal justices will arrive “at the same place,” what “matters at the Supreme Court is those 5% of cases that are truly difficult. In those cases, adherence to precedent and rules of construction will only get you through 25 miles of the marathon. That last mile can only be determined on the basis of one’s deepest values, one’s core concerns, one’s broader perspectives on how the world works and the depth and breadth of one’s empathy.”

Folks, under that criteria, you and I have a shot at being appointed — as long as we are pro-abortion, of course.

Obama would also have the ability to appoint hundreds of lower court judges who will be happily confirmed by what is expected to be a Democratic Senate.

The biggest loser, of course, would be the unborn babies who have waited far too long for the justice they deserve.

To read the entire National Journal article, please click here.

Barbara Lyons