In a few days we will celebrate our nation's birthday. At this moment, 234 years ago, men of honor and accomplishment understood that signing the Declaration of Independence could very well be likened to signing their own death warrant. They signed it anyway.

Today I must ask, why did they sign it? Did they mutually pledge their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor so that they and their descendants could enjoy the blessings of a central government micro-managing virtually every aspect of their lives? Who, reading these words, would sacrifice everything including life itself to enable the government to tell you to eat your vegies?

And yet, ...and yet when asked if the Commerce Clause to the Constitution gave the federal government that exact power, Elena Kagan couldn't bring herself to say no. Here was a hypothetical that should have been dismissed as an unconstitutional exercise in reductio ad absurdum, and knocked down as insanely outside the reach of the government, but Kagan wouldn't do it. For that reason alone, Senate Republicans should fight this nomination with every tool in their arsenal.

Asked by Senator Coburn if she personally agreed with the Declaration of Independence's acknowledgment that our rights come from God, rather than from the government, Kagan could not bring herself to endorse the concept. So we have a nominee who finds few constraints on the government in a Constitution designed precisely to constrain government, while simultaneously declining to endorse the proposition that our rights do not come from the government. Because you see, if the government can give rights, it can also take them away, and therein lies the coercive foundation of the left's mischief.

The very idea that such Constitutional incoherence could be nominated to the Supreme Court is scandalous in itself. The greater scandal would be for Republicans to allow this nonsense to proceed without a serious fight. There could be no more fitting tribute to those brave souls who sacrificed so much over two centuries ago, than for their successors to use every legislative means available to stop Ms. Kagan's appointment to the court. To do anything less is to acquiesce in the continuing dismembermemt of the Constitution, and with it, our liberty.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Devin Cole
Joined
May '10
Devin Cole

Use every means possible to stop Ms. Kagan's appointment to SCOTUS. I agree.

The reality is that there are not enough Republicans in the Senate to block her appointment, I am afraid.

Short of this admirable aim, however, I think the Senate Republicans have an opportunity, indeed a duty, to differentiate conservative principles from what Ms. Kagan represents. I think this can be key to a conservative resurgence in representation this November.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In