Bork from Ork

In a recent post, we went over some of the latest antics of Florida Senator Marco Rubio, a potential Vice Presidential running mate to join Romney on the GOP’s 2012 ticket.

Another name we know for sure Romney is bringing to the dinner table is retired judge, Robert Bork.  Bork is Romney’s top judicial adviser, which is nothing short of horrifying.

Bork is a follower of Constitution originalism.  This means that Bork does not see the constitution as a living document that can be altered or amended, but rather simply upheld as what is perceived to be the Founding Fathers’ original intentions.

Historically, Bork was greatly opposed to the Civil Rights Act. At the time of its signing, Bork wrote: “The principle of such legislation is that if I find your behavior ugly by my standards, moral or aesthetic, and if you prove stubborn about adopting my view of the situation, I am justified in having the state coerce you into more righteous paths.  That is itself a principle of unsurpassed ugliness.”  This guy sounds like a winner.

Bork also has issues with the interpretation of the First Amendment, namely the part where science, pornography and artistic expression are covered.  Bork wrote: “There is no basis for judicial intervention to protect any other form of expression, be it scientific, literary or that variety of expression we call obscene or pornographic.”

One thing we know for certain:  a Romney administration will not be supportive of equal rights for same-sex couples, as Romney signed NOM’s anti-gay marriage pledge.  You could say Bork shares the same views…with a dash of homemade batshit crazy.
In May of 2004, the House of Representatives heard arguments on a proposed constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriage.  Bork spoke before the House in favor of the amendment, claiming the legalization of same-sex marriage would create an increase in out-of-wedlock births and a decrease in heterosexual marriages.  He further believed such an amendment was necessary to prevent state and federal judges from allowing same-sex marriages.

Bork’s views on women’s healthcare are just as supportive as his views towards same-sex marriage.  In 1982, Bork said the following in regards to the groundbreaking Roe v. Wade decision: “Roe v. Wade is an unconstitutional decision, a serious and wholly unjustifiable judicial usurpation of state legislative authority.  I also think that Roe v. Wade is by no means the only example of such unconstitutional behavior by the Supreme Court.”

In 1987, Bork was nominated by then President Ronald Reagan to the Supreme Court.  Bork’s nomination caused a mighty controversy, even with his toned-down views (as suggested by the Reagan administration) during his testimony.  The Judiciary Committee voted 9 to 5 against Bork.  After Bork’s rejection, Anthony Kennedy received the nomination and eventually took what would have been Bork’s place on the Supreme Court.

In 1992, the Supreme Court voted on the re-affirmation of Roe v. Wade during the Planned Parenthood v. Casey case.  The vote was 5-4, in favor of upholding Roe.  The deciding vote was cast by Justice Kennedy.

What is truly terrifying about the inclusion of Bork to the potential Romney administration (yes, even more terrifying than the velociraptor attack of Rubio & Ryan) is the next president will likely be appointing multiple Supreme Court justices during their term.
The modern-day Republican Party has been looking backward, not forward.  Their tax policies stay within the Bush era, while their views on social issues, including female healthcare and equality for same-sex couples, go back even further.  The appointing of Robert Bork signals a Romney administration that will not be looking ahead to the future, but remain in the past, repeating the same mistakes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s