Dissing the Courts

There's a lot of frenzied denunciation of Tom Delay over his attack on the courts. Ted Olson is the latest critic, but he ends his piece with this point, which I've been making:

No discussion of the judiciary should close without reference to the shambles that the Senate confirmation process has become. It does no good to speculate about how or when the disintegration began, which political interest has been the most culpable, or the point at which the appointment of judges became completely dysfunctional. That sort of debate is both endless and futile. The only hope for an end to the downward spiral is for the combatants to lay down their arms; stop using judicial appointments to excite special-interest constituencies and political fund-raising; move forward with votes on qualified, responsible and respected nominees so that those who have the support of a majority of the Senate can be confirmed, as contemplated by the Constitution; and remove the rancor and gamesmanship from the judicial selection process.

We expect dignity, wisdom, decency, civility, integrity and restraint from our judges. It is time to exercise those same characteristics in our dealings with, and commentary on, those same judges -- from their appointment and confirmation, to their decision-making once they take office. [Italics added]

The reason the confirmation process is a shambles is that the Court allowed itself to be used as a political branch. It should have understood that making abortion and homosexual sodomy matters of Constitutional rights would result in just this situation, and avoided them. This remains a democratic government, and if the courts get too far out ahead of the people, it will blow back in their faces. Now SCOTUS has adopted international standards as a guide to interpreting our Constitution. I don't think that most Americans care for that, and they could very well support some measure to make the justices more accountable. I hope it's not so severe that it makes a politicized court permanent.