Supreme Court Vacancy
May 8, 2009 | By Nathaniel Ward
Last week, Supreme Court Justice David Souter announced his retirement, providing President Barack Obama with his first opportunity to nominate someone to the high court.
Liberal groups are already pressuring the administration to name a left-wing activist to the court. But they should remember that judges are not in the business of writing laws or twisting it to serve their policy preferences.
"Obama should seek judges who will apply the law as it was written, not how they would like it to be written to address the particular parties before them," Heritage Foundation legal scholar Robert Alt writes in the New York Post. "To do otherwise in replacing Souter will surely shift the Court further to the left, and further away from the rule of law."
"Americans don't want judges who will bend the law toward the side they favor," writes Heritage Foundation Ronald Reagan Fellow and former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese. "They want a fair judge who will apply the law in the same way -- as the people's representatives in the legislature wrote it -- regardless of who is before the court."
During the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, then-Senator Obama said, "I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent. I believe it calls for meaningful advice and consent and that includes an examination of a judge's philosophy, ideology, and record." Conservatives agree with this, which is why it's important to closely examine the future nominee.
Conservatives must also remember that Justice Souter was not a consistent liberal activist, and replacing him is "not a zero-sum game," argues Heritage senior legal fellow Andrew Grossman. While Justice Souter is a far cry from an originalist — one who applies the original meaning of the Constitution — Heritage legal experts agree that his record demonstrates a rather conservative approach in certain areas, including crime, punishment, lawsuit abuse, and various social issues.
- Amanda Reinecker
Speaking out for school choice in D.C.
When it comes to education, the Obama administration has promised to "fund what works." So why does the administration continue to hedge on whether to fund the popular and visibly successful school choice program for disadvantaged kids in the nation's capital?
This past Wednesday, over 1,000 concerned Americans rallied in support of the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship program, which allows 1,700 children to attend private schools instead of the failing city schools.
» Learn more about education choice in the nation's capital
Heritage Foundation education expert Dan Lips reports that program participants and their parents criticized the "hypocrisy of Congress bailing out failing corporations but taking scholarships away from D.C. students."
Statistics demonstrate the effectiveness of voucher and scholarship programs that allow underprivileged students to attend private schools. Members of Congress have drawn the same conclusions: a recent Heritage report reveals that a third of lawmakers have chosen to send their kids to private schools. Perhaps they will consider allowing disadvantaged families to do the same.
- Amanda Reinecker
A common-sense labor law reform
Rewarding workers for their achievements "used to be the pathway to the American dream for hard-working people," recalls Heritage Vice President Stuart Butler. "But today, for millions it's illegal."
Federal union regulations impose pay "ceilings" that legally prohibit employers from rewarding union members who perform well on the job. Even if an employer wants to grant performance bonuses, his hands are tied.
"Rigid pay rules frustrate talented people who should have the chance to earn the rewards they deserve and climb the economic ladder," writes Butler.
The solution? Heritage expert James Sherk's proposal to amend the National Labor Relations Act. Such a reform could mean an additional $2,600 to $4,300 a year for the most deserving laborers, and it would allow employers to offer incentives for superior work product. "It's time to remove that legally imposed glass ceiling," Butler concludes.
- Amanda Reinecker
In other news
- The Treasury Department has announced the results of its three-month "stress test" on 19 of the nation's largest banks. The report concluded that the federal government no longer needed to prop up many banks.
- CIA officials released documents revealing that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was briefed in September 2002 about the use interrogation tactics against al-Qaeda prisoners.
- After receiving billions in federal bailout funds, automaker giant General Motors has outlined a restructuring plan that would transfer manufacturing jobs to lower-cost overseas facilities.
- The World Health Organization has drawn strong criticism for raising the alarm about swine flu, alarm which appears unwarranted in hindsight.
Coming up at Heritage
To attend these or any other events at Heritage please RSVP at Heritage's website. Or you can view these events live online. All times are Eastern.
- On Tuesday, May 12 at noon, Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) outlines the conservative principles for health care reform.
- On Tuesday, May 12 at 12:30 p.m., Pete Hegseth of Vets for Freedom and freelance writer Gabe Ledeen discuss the Iraq war from their perspectives as veterans.
Nathaniel Ward is the Editor of MyHeritage.org—a website for members and supporters of The Heritage Foundation. Amanda Reinecker contributed to this report.
