« Our 'President of Leisure' can't be bothered with the world's problems | Iran's Supreme Leader spurns Obama overtures »
November 4, 2009

Another radical judge gets a lifetime appointment

By Ed Lasky

Underneath the radar screen, Barack Obama has continued his campaign to radically shift American policies and practices. A key target has been the judiciary branch of the government, nominally supposed to be an independent branch of the government that serves as one of the checks and balances.

However, in the hands of Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, and a complaint Senate that confirms judicial appointments, the third branch has become merely an appendage of the Executive branch. While the spotlight was focused on Sonia Sotomayor, a quieter and stealthier takeover of the judicial system has been creeping ahead as one radical Federal judge after another is appointed and approved by the Senate. These judges have lifetime tenure and are able to interpret, enforce, and (in a sense) rewrite laws through evolving case law.

 


The latest battle is being waged over the nomination of David Hamilton to the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

 

Senate Democrats are proving once again that no judicial nominee is too extreme for them to stomach. A move seems to be afoot to open debate on the Senate floor this week on the nomination of David Hamilton of Indiana to the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. This judge is a radical's radical.

 

Senator Jeff Sessions , the ranking Republican on the Judicary Committee, has sent a letter to fellow Senators on the Committee outlining his objections, as reported in this Washington Times editorial:

 

 

The senator first objected to Judge Hamilton's stated belief that judges should effectively amend the Constitution - "writing footnotes to the Constitution," the judge called it - through evolving case law. Second, Judge Hamilton has publicly and specifically embraced the president's "empathy standard," which even Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has now openly rejected.

Third, Judge Hamilton in many cases has shown an extreme hostility against innocuous expressions of religion in the public square. Mr. Sessions noted, though, that Judge Hamilton's odd ruling in Hinrichs v. Bosma "prohibited prayers in the Indiana House of Representatives that expressly mentioned Jesus Christ ... yet he allowed prayers which mentioned Allah."

 

 

Fourth, Mr. Sessions pointed out that "lawyers in the Almanac of the Federal Judiciary describe Judge Hamilton as one of the most lenient judges in his district on criminal matters," including the case of a police officer who videotaped his own sexual encounters with two teenagers. The senator also objects to the judge's extreme actions in blocking an "informed consent" law on abortion.


The judge also had no problem representing Indianapolis when it took over the property of a private business to benefit another private business - an abuse of the "eminent domain" power that is supposed to restrict such government takeovers to situations that directly benefit the public.

 

The Washington Times neglects to mention one fact about Hamilton. He is the nephew of former Congressman Lee Hamilton: a Democrat who gave cover to Obama during the campaign regarding his foreign policy views. I have written about the close ties between Hamilton and Obama. Lee Hamilton has also praised a laudatory book about the Shiite terror group Hezbollah. So now, we can understand how his nephew seemingly favors Allah over Jesus in the public square.

 

 

An Obama administration official has said this nomination is a signal about the types of judges the president wants. And we will hear very little about them - very little. Obama's reign will extend for many years after he leaves office as these judges are there for life.


If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com

Recent Articles

Blog Posts

Monthly Archives