More Extreme Anti-Judicial Rhetoric

I swear there must be some sort of office pool at Religious Right headquarters to see who can come up with the most ridiculous and hyperbolic rhetoric against judges. Here's the latest from Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council:

"The court has become increasingly hostile to Christianity, and it poses a greater threat to representative government -- more than anything, more than budget deficits, more than terrorist groups," he said last week.

Can rumors of late night rituals where they drink the blood of children be far behind?

More like this

Rhetorical bombs thrown at courts and judges are a common theme on the right and have been for quite some time. Any judge who rules against them is branded an "activist judge" seeking to impose "judicial tyranny". We hear constant screeds against "unelected judges" who "subvert the will of the…
So I posted the other day about the Federal judge striking down Oklahoma's law that prohibited them from recognizing adoptions by gays performed in other states. You had to know the religious right was going to react by throwing a blizzard of empty catchphrases around, right? Here's the little…
One of the most frightening trends of the last few years is the alarming increase in anti-judicial rhetoric from the right. The courts, of course, are a convenient whipping boy for politicians who have to manipulate the populace to get elected to office. The courts are often in the position of…
Judge William Pryor has an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal responding to recent arguments from Justice O'Connor concerning attacks on the judiciary (and perhaps to Judge Jones from the Dover trial as well, he has been saying much the same thing O'Connor has in speeches recently). Orin Kerr thinks…

I for one hope they become increasingly strident and outrageous. That way, one hopes, the ordinary guy who isn't either a rightwing religious fundamentalist nut or a flaming liberal christian hater will start to think maybe those RRFNs are a little odd and maybe ought not to be listened to.

By Mark Paris (not verified) on 14 Apr 2005 #permalink

This is all getting out of hand. I'm almost becoming scared. What exactly judges have done different in the past year than they did in the previous 200, I'm not sure. I don't know how this is going to end, but it's probably not going to be pretty.

Can rumors of late night rituals where they drink the blood of children be far behind?

I haven't heard about that, but I did hear that the judiciary meets at midnight deep in the forest where they have unnatural sexual relations with Satan and his demons.

It's true you know.

By Troy Britain (not verified) on 14 Apr 2005 #permalink

Let's be clear, if the judiciary is hostile to anything, it is the imposition of a religious orthodoxy in place of the Constitution.

What's scarier here, folks: the fact that some mushwit referred to a Supreme Court justice as being an advocate of "Leninist" and "Satanist" laws and was actually taken seriously by the group that hosted him, or that the majority leader of the majority party in the House of Representatives seems utterly bereft of a clue about how judicial review works or the precedent that Marbury v. Madison set concerning it?

It seems to me that there's only one way to explain how all of this came to pass:

'shrooms. And really powerful ones, at that.

Because if it's not because of drugs, then these people are serious. That's clearly not an acceptable alternative.

By Chris Krolczyk (not verified) on 15 Apr 2005 #permalink