Seth Cooper, the Discovery Institute counsel I mentioned a couple days ago, has now written, rather surprisingly perhaps, that he supports Arlen Specter for the chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee. But in the course of his rather lukewarm endorsement, he makes this statement:
In fact, I find Sen. Specter’s treatment of Judge Robert Bork in his 1987 confirmation hearings to be nothing short of shameful. Sen. Specter had recently made reference to his actions in that painful episode. It was a mistake for Sen. Specter to do that. He should have expected the much-deserved backlash for it.
It always baffles me to see even SoCons like Cooper, especially those with legal training, come to the defense of Bork. It makes me wonder if they’ve ever actually read any of his legal writings, which are filled with outrageous and dangerous opinions on Constitutional law. This is the man who in 1971 wrote, “Constitutional protection should be accorded only to speech that is explicitly political. There is no basis for judicial intervention to protect any other form of expression, be it scientific, literary, or that variety of expression we call obscene or pornographic.” No Consitutional protection for literary or scientific speech whatsoever? I’m sorry, that opinion is so far off the absurdity scale that the mere uttering of it is prima facie evidence of insanity. And it certainly ought to disqualify one from a seat on the Supreme Court. Sorry, Mr. Cooper, Arlen Specter was quite right to oppose Bork’s nomination and he should feel pride for having kept this authoritarian off the court, not shame.