Skip navigation

Monthly Archives: July 2013

“Immigration reform” in today’s Orwell-esque public discourse (doublespeak) translates into legalization of those who are here illegally and not doing much to discourage future waves of illegal immigration. The aptly named, “Gang of Eight” in the Senate, conjured up a bill for this purpose and then for good measure loaded it with pork for their own benefit.

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) has been loudly and publically fighting back.

Here we have yet another instance of feel-good self-serving policy making, while substantive solutions to the issues most important to most Americans remain unaddressed. It is difficult not to characterize this one as: the immigration bill is good for us, the public be damned. Read More »


The media has managed to vilify Robert Bork to such an extent that his recent passing was hardly a blip on the continuum. Bork was one of the best legal minds in the country during his time and argued before the Supreme Court on many occasions. As Solicitor General, he was also the central figure in bringing down Richard Nixon around the Watergate affair and convicting no fewer than 48 administration officials of crimes.

After returning to Yale Law School from government, Bork continued his lifelong work of saving the Constitution from activist judges: those who render opinions based on politics and personal instincts and experiences, vs. the Constitution. He began this effort in earnest in 1971 with a publication in the Indiana Law Review. He later published, The Tempting of America and after his death, Saving Justice. Both books made the case for what is now known as “originalism.”

Here is the gist of originalism. After some recent Court decisions, it is worth knowing what this means.

  • “A legitimate Court must be controlled by principles exterior to the will of the Justices.”
  • The Court must “accept any value choice the legislature makes unless in clearly runs contrary to a choice made in the framing of the Constitution.”
  • A “judge must stick close to the text and the history” and their fair implications, and not construct new rights.

Bork’s last written words were these:

“It bears endless repeating that we are now being ruled in some of our most crucial cultural and moral issues by judges who have acquired the power, but certainly not the authority, to take these decisions out of our hands… They continue their attack on the basic structure of the law by filling the categories of law and politics. Originalism provides hope that the constitutional structure of our country will be maintained.”

The inspiration for this post and some of its text was sourced from National Review, July 2013, Charles J. Cooper

The following by Joel B. Pollack and posted on 17 July on, is reproduced here verbatim.

“One of the biggest of many falsehoods circulating in the mainstream media about immigration reform is that House Republicans feel no pressure to pass a bill because they represent predominantly “white” districts–as if opposition to the “Gang of Eight” legislation were based on racial prejudice, not policy or principle.

“The Associated Press took things further Wednesday in an article about Paul Ryan’s immigration stance: “…House Republicans in gerrymandered districts with few Hispanic voters,” it argued, Read More »