Stupid, callous, oblivious to U.S. history… oh, sorry there. I got distracted thinking up adjectives to describe certain members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The ones who yesterday tried to savage U.S. Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan because she clerked for, and admires, a man they consider “out of the mainstream”: Thurgood Marshall.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (Ala.), the ranking Republican on the panel, branded Marshall a “well-known activist.” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said Marshall’s legal view “does not comport with the proper role of a judge or judicial method.” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) pronounced Marshall “a judicial activist” with a “judicial philosophy that concerns me.”
Justice Marshall, former Solicitor General of the United States, the man who successfully argued Brown v. Board of Education, and the first African American to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, was a giant of 20th century jurisprudence and an American hero. In person, his presence was formidable. At oral argument, I once saw him reduce the Attorney General of Missouri to a puddle on the courtroom floor — with just two words. The Attorney General had asserted some conclusion about his case, and Marshall asked the man for facts to back up his assertion. The Attorney General said, “I don’t have that information.” Marshall paused, leaned forward, and thundered, “Why not?” Good God, it terrified me, and I was sitting in the back of the visitors’ gallery.
As Dana Milbank notes in the Washington Post:
It was, to say the least, a curious strategy to go after Marshall, the iconic civil rights lawyer who successfully argued Brown vs. Board of Education. Did Republicans think it would help their cause to criticize the first African American on the Supreme Court, a revered figure who has been celebrated with an airport, a postage stamp and a Broadway show? The guy is a saint — literally. Marshall this spring was added to the Episcopal Church’s list of “Holy Women and Holy Men,” which the Episcopal Diocese of New York says “is akin to being granted sainthood.”
With Kagan’s confirmation hearings expected to last most of the week, Republicans may still have time to make cases against Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa and Gandhi.
Couldn’t agree with you more, Meg. Love the last line from that Dana Milbank article, though.
Best,
J.F.
Wow, Meg, you heard Thurgood Marshall in person? Can I touch you?! Wish we had a whole court full of Marshalls. Am so disgusted with these activist right-winger justices overturning precedent that has protected the common folk — election financing fairness, common-sense gun restrictions, etc. If Obama gets an opportunity to nominate another justice, hope he’ll stop pussyfooting around and nominate a strong advocate for the common good vs big business or the NRA.
The US Constitution seems to mean less to federal officials than it did when it was first penned. In 2003, a police detective in Danville, Virginia tampered with a defense witness during a rape trial. The public defender did nothing about it. This case involves corrupt/racist Danville officials from a judge on down. State officials (state attorney, state bar, governor) have done nothing about it. The defendant has not been given an appeal attorney. It’s a cover up. And the White media denies access. The defendant’s Constitutional Rights to a fair trial, legal representation and fair appeal has been violated but the USDOJ has not responded to my request for an investigation and a fair REAL trial. This reads like something from the 1900′s doesn’t it. Well, it’s happening now in this new century. Black citizens still have no protection from corrupt/racist Danville officials.
http://dvjustice.blogspot.com