From E.J. Dionne Jr. of the Washington Post, a piece on contradictory strategies by the White House.
>>Shortly after Bush named John Roberts to the Supreme Court, a few Democrats, including Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), suggested that the nominee might reasonably be questioned about the impact of his religious faith on his decisions as a justice.
Durbin had his head taken off. "We have no religious tests for public office in this country," thundered Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), insisting that any inquiry about a potential judge's religious views was "offensive." Fidelis, a conservative Catholic group, declared that "Roberts' religious faith and how he lives that faith as an individual has no bearing and no place in the confirmation process."<<
Friday, October 07, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Non-voting supporters (or detractors) of President Bush may use any evaluative criteria that they like, including religion, in judging the fitness of a Supreme Court nominee. Senator Durbin is expressly prohibited from applying a religious test by Article VI of the United States Constitution. That Mr. Dionne ignores this fact speaks volumes of the casual disregard that he and his ilk have for the text of our nation's charter.
Post a Comment