Cass Sunstein reflects on the Roberts and Alito hearings and doesn’t like what he sees. The new "script" emphasizes "fidelity to law," which might get future Democratic nominees in trouble. Of course, he says, everything is much, much more complicated than that, but here’s the bottom line, as he sees it:
That process has been successfully un-Borked. If President Bush is able to fill other vacancies on the Supreme Court, the right script is firmly in place. And if Democratic presidents are able to fill future vacancies, their nominees may well run into trouble, because it will be easy to characterize them as wanting to "add to the Constitution or subtract from the Constitution."
I shed no tears for Sunstein.
Mega-dittoes. I shed no tears for him either. Nice to see that one of the spokesmen for constitutional misinterpretation is feeling some faint premonition of the pain we constitutionalists have felt for more than 40 years.
These people can dish it out, but they sure can’t take it.
If the American people have seen fit by that time to elect a Democratic Senate whose members believe in a "growing" Constitution, then they won’t have a problem. I have been troubled by the Republicans seeming hesitation to use their elected majority to solidify the consitutionalist position. Of course, part of the problem is that the "moderates" are apparently not convinced of the rightness of that position.