Sunday, September 07, 2003

Robert Alt says that racism was behind the Miguel Estrada controversy.
Indeed, if Congress were an ordinary employer and a federal judgeship were treated as a job under federal antidiscrimination law, then Estrada would likely win on a claim of employment discrimination. . .

John Roberts was asked relatively few questions during his confirmation hearing, while Estrada was pummeled with over 200. Roberts, nominated the same day as Estrada, was confirmed by the Senate on a voice vote, while Estrada was denied the opportunity to even have a vote.

Democrats will inevitably respond that they opposed Estrada because they believed that he was conservative. But they had less reason to believe he was conservative than Roberts. This demonstrates what is at the heart of the issue: They opposed him more vehemently because he was perceived to be a conservative Hispanic, and as such is thought to be a viable Supreme Court nominee.

Democrats have long used threats of prejudice and racism to gain power. That's why Trent Lott is a racist and Robert Byrd is an elder statesman. Whether denying Estrada is racist or not, I don't know, but it fits the criteria for things they consider racist. If the media were conservative or even centrist, these kinds of contradictions would be lead stories on the nightly news.

No comments:

Post a Comment