It takes a certain degree of audacity for an arsonist to dress up as the firefighter, as Republicans like Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah (F, 35%) are want to do during election season. After spending years codifying the agenda of the Left, these same people turn around a few months before an election to lecture conservatives on the importance of voting for Republicans in order to stop those very policies.
Nobody has performed this art of deception better than Sen. Orrin Hatch. Now, he has expanded his artifice to the debate over the courts.
In an op-ed for the Washington Times, Hatch asserts that the Court is the most important issue of the election and that if Hillary is allowed to win, we will suffer from the most liberal Supreme Court in 80 years. He added that the gravity of this issue is elevated by the fact that “Supreme Court justices do more than just decide legal cases. To a great extent, they shape the kind of country we have.” He also notes, as we have many times, that the lower courts are more important than people think because they decide most cases and that Obama has appointed 40 percent of the judiciary.
I don’t disagree that there are many issues at stake in this election and am not here to tell people who to vote for. It’s also true that, when viewed in a vacuum, the courts can and will always get worse. But the entire premise of Hatch’s op-ed is built upon constitutional ignorance, and masques his own drive-by hypocrisy. In fact, it is Hatch’s mentality towards judicial nominees, and the role of the courts in general, that has gotten us to this point of judicial apocalypse.
As I’ve written in numerous articles, in my book, and my manifest on why the courts are irremediably broken, we have reached the point where merely appointing “better judges” will not save the judiciary. Congress must finally recognize its power to rein in the courts and stop wrongly conceding that the courts have the ability to shape the direction of the country. In fact, Hamilton said they were to have “neither force nor will” over the direction of the country. And yes, while the courts can always get worse, Hatch might not have gotten the memo that the courts are already more liberal than at any time in our history. They did redefine the building block of civilization, mandate transgenderism, destroy religious liberty, require funding for abortions, codify disparate impact, grant citizen rights to illegals, force states to give illegal aliens birth certificates, crush state sovereignty, and throw Kim Davis in jail for being a Christian — in case Hatch hasn’t been watching. Then again, Hatch actually supports the sexual identity religion.
Which brings me to the broader problem with Republicans like Orrin Hatch as it relates to judicial tyranny. Their version of “originalism” is very different from ours. Hatch is evidently not offended by the existing judiciary because he supported it. As leading Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, he embodies the problem. In the early ‘90s, in response to Democrats borking Reagan nominees, Hatch championed Justices Ginsburg as a “very excellent” choices. Likewise, Hatch sang the praises of Justice Breyer, saying “He will bring a wealthy of knowledge and experience to the Supreme Court.”
And what about the circuit court judges? In his op-ed, Hatch warns that they “serve as a “farm team” for future Supreme Court nominations.” He’s exactly right. That’s why Hatch’s vote to confirm Sonia Sotomayor to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in October, 1998 — while Republicans had the majority in the Senate to block her — was so consequential. Had Hatch and the other RINOs joined the 29 Republicans who voted no, she would not be on the Supreme Court today. Hatch also voted for many of Obama’s lower court nominees, while his colleague from Utah, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah (A, 100%), was leading the fight to block them.
Nonetheless, Hatch would have us think that if we don’t vote for his like-minded RINOs, things will get even worse.
This game is getting old. Orrin Hatch epitomizes the problem with this failed two party system. He knows conservatives are on the plantation and as long as he lies to them during the election, they are stuck with him for six more years. Just take a look at Hatch’s 35% LibertyScore®.
If we needed advice on fighting the raging fire of judicial tyranny, perhaps we should find someone who wasn’t at the scene of the crime when it mattered.
Daniel Horowitz is a senior editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.