facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

All could have learned from Bork



Published: Mon, January 7, 2013 @ 12:00 a.m.

All could have learned from Bork

Judge Robert Bork’s recent death should remind us of the merits obtained by adhering to the mandates set forth in our primary governing document, the U.S. Constitution.

Our Founders were keenly aware of the danger from over reaching intrusions into early American lives due to central authority of the King of England imposing punitive measures designed to tax, curtail, restrict or oppressively prohibit most activities associated especially with commerce, individual pursuits and the exercise of religious practices.

The single most important aspect of the Constitution is not its direct mandates but the implied moral instructive to adhere to its clearly articulated clauses. Legislatively challenging and attempting to interpret it to fit the personal agenda of either a chief executive (president), a legislative leader or a judge can only erode and eventually completely undermine the rule of law stated in the Constitution and the country it serves. Judge Bork understood the dangers of deviating from this moral instructive and bravely said so.

For example he stated, “Without the Constitution’s original intent as their guide, justices (judges) are left with merely their own moral philosophy.”

Robert Bork’s presidential nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court more than 30 years ago failed when Senate confirmation was denied by Senate leaders whose philosophical political agenda trumped reason. He since continued to wisely instruct by his teaching in academia and elsewhere until his death at 85.

Atty. Carl D. Rafoth, Youngstown


Comments

1TB(1167 comments)posted 1 year, 3 months ago

Implication lies in the eyes of the beholder apparently. How about that bit about counting population in the original document Carl? You still ok with that piece?

Suggest removal:

2Jerry(444 comments)posted 1 year, 3 months ago

@ TB

Presumably you mean the provision about counting black slaves from Africa as 3/5 of a person for the purpose of representation in Congress.

Were you aware that this was a provision put in place by the representatives of non-slave states to LIMIT the spread of slavery and the power of those who promoted slavery, and it worked? Had the slaves been counted in their entirety, the slave-states would have gained a disproportionate amount of legislative power in the Congress by getting extra representatives on the backs of people they did not allow to live free, much less allow to vote. In fact, the USA may not have been able to limit and finally abolish the institution of slavery had this provision NOT been placed in the Constitution.

Your sanctimonious assertion that this provision was “wrong” suggests that you might have supported empowering the slave-states to expand and perpetuate slavery.

Suggest removal:

3rickking123(247 comments)posted 1 year, 3 months ago

Jerry

Excellent comment. It's funny how many people don't realize the significance of that Constitutional provision and why slaves were counted in such a manner.

Probably right up there with the people who quote Shakespeare's "let's kill all the lawyers" as an anti-lawyer comment when in fact it was not.

Suggest removal:

4TB(1167 comments)posted 1 year, 3 months ago

Oh I definitely know the history of it. But explaining the context of why it was passed doesn't change what the legal ramifications would be today were we to go with the original document.

Correct?

You also left out the compromise of where to place the nation's capitol. It's ok. Cast aspersions because the FACTUAL statement I made still hasn't been addressed.

Suggest removal:

5TB(1167 comments)posted 1 year, 3 months ago

And...no response

Suggest removal:

6bumbob(123 comments)posted 1 year, 3 months ago

What can be learned from Bork is how to stall out during the nomination process and not become a Supreme Court Justice. Other than that I'd say he was a pretty unremarkable man.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport