Economic equality, a constitutional right? It isn’t yet, but mark my words, if the left has its way, it will be. How is this to be accomplished in a capitalist society? The 14th amendment. The 14th amendment, benevolent in its intent, will be flipped on its head and bastardized into a constitutional law providing economic equality as a right. Remember the 2001 audio clip, in which Mr. Obama was discussing the Warren Court, that resurfaced during the presidential campaign? In this interview, Mr. Obama states:
“Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of the redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical.”
It is, and has been, clear from day one that Mr. Obama has socialistic leanings (in the same sense that Karl Marx had them). What has not always been clear is the methods that he will use to achieve his end goal – economic “justice.” While his tax plan is a clear enough example, it may not see its way through Congress. It is my opinion, and prediction, that Mr. Obama will use the courts. More specifically the U.S. Supreme Court. It has already been stated that Mr. Obama will have the opportunity to appoint at least two new judges with the possibility of a third. While the religious right and social conservatives have mostly focused on these appointments as a way for the left to maintain Roe and pass FOCA; I submit to you that, while the aforementioned are important, the real “snake in the grass” – the most critical area for concentration, will be the interpretation of the 14th amendment. In its current form it states:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
To any person with common sense, something that most liberals clearly lack, this amendment is straight forward. When it was written, it sought to protect the civil rights of the then newly freed slaves (13th amendment circa 1865) by properly defining citizenship. However, as Mr. Obama so eagerly revealed in the previously metioned interview, the Warren Court – in its application of the 14th amendment – was not nearly radical enough. To Mr. Obama the Warren Court’s failure was that it did not address the issue of redistribution of wealth. It is my contention that Mr. Obama will attempt to right this wrong through the appointment of like minded activist judges. I believe that Mr. Obama hopes to create a Warren-esque Court, only more radical. Mr. Obama will attempt to stack the bench with no less than five justices who are willing to not only legislate from the bench, but also willing to transform the constitution. He would like for these judges to share his view of “economic justice” and shape the constitution accordingly by interpreting, or rewriting, the 14th amendment to provide all citizens an equal share of the economic pie.
During President Bush’s judicial appointment process, the Democrats used judicial litmus testing to reject or confirm appointments to the bench. We learned, during the presidential campaign, that Barack Obama is in favor of judicial litmus testing. Knowing this, one could safely bet on a reoccurance for Mr. Obama’s appointments. The key difference is that the Democrats will be looking for activists, and the Republicans will be trying to block those types of appointments (I hope). The tendency for Republicans will be to test based on the judge’s stance on Roe Vs Wade and FOCA. I would caution them also to look carefully at that judge’s stance on domestic issues as well. Mr. Obama intends to use his appointments to reshape forever this country through the constitution. While it may begin with the bastardization of the 14th amendment, it most certainly will not end there. It bares reminding what Mr. Obama’s idea of the constitution is.
“[The Constitution] Says what the states can’t do to you… what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.”
Mr. Obama believes that the constitution should not be the limiting document that it is. In that it shouldn’t describe what the government can not do. He believes that it should, instead, describe what the government must do on your behalf. Hold on to your wallets, folks, someone else may soon have a right to it.