Commentary: Why Judges Should Be Seen and Not Heard
It's not easy to pick the most ridiculous aspect of a generally ridiculous case about the Pledge of Allegiance now wending its way out of California (of course) toward the Supreme Court of the United States -- like a clown car approaching a railroad crossing.
Soon enough adults in suits and ties will be asserting that the mention of "under God" in the pledge is unconstitutional -- right after the high court begins its deliberations with the traditional incantation, "God save this honorable court."
But here's my favorite seriocomic aspect of this case: The most lucid thinker on the Supreme Court -- yes, I know that's faint praise -- has recused himself from hearing it.
Get the rest of the commentary from the Star Telegram.
Matt's Chat
Once again, it is quite clear that the conservative Supreme Court Justice Scalia did the right thing in recusing himself. It is apparent that he had a bias in this particular case (the Pledge). It is too bad that he felt so strongly about "under God" that he had to speak out and thus be later forced to recuse himself from the very decision he could have championed. Or maybe it isn't. For my money, Justice Scalia has shown us that integrity is something that isn't dead (yet) in Washington. Scalia and President Bush are the two shining beacons of doing what you believe is right regardless of political consequences.Mark's Remarks
I could not agree more. The sad part about our justice system today is the amount of legislating from the bench, instead of focusing on seeing that justice is served. Instead of deciding on merits and arguments, many courts are out to make reputations for themselves, some rather dubious (see the California Fed. Court).
