Rebuilding New Orleans—and the Supreme Court
By Isaiah Z. Sterrett (09/09/05)
WITH THE Storm of the Century behind us, we await another storm—a political storm—in which the stakes constitute nothing less than the future of the judiciary.
We mourn the suffering in New Orleans and the surrounding areas, but worry about what the future of that region will hold. We mourn the departure of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, a patriot whose influence on America has been immense—much more so than most realize.
Condoleezza Rice had to travel all the way to Alabama to point out that the response to Katrina wasn’t race-based, but it’s a fact that—with a case in which the Chief Justice dissented—the Supreme Court literally sanctioned race-based admissions guidelines at University of Michigan Law School. Writing with the majority, Sandra Day O’Connor actually argued, with great panache, that in twenty-five years—a figure she has yet to back up—such discrimination won’t be necessary. But for now, she wrote, race still matters.
As with media coverage of the Supreme Court, we’ve seen much finger-pointing since Katrina, but very little analysis of reality. When it comes to assessing the fate of the Southern states impacted by the hurricane, let me join those who say we don’t need a Congressional commission. (It would be interesting, nonetheless, from a purely academic standpoint, to find out who would serve on such a body. If Jamie Gorlick can serve on the 9/11 Commission, can the looters serve on the Hurricane Commission?) If we’re interested in what caused the hurricane, we should consult meteorology textbooks—not Washington, D.C.
In a political context, disaster in New Orleans and death in the Supreme Court leave President Bush with a burden unconscionable only a few weeks ago. I suggest to the White House, as a result, a primetime address to a Joint Session of Congress, in which the president will be able to define the hurricane situation from a federal standpoint; reiterate the importance of a responsible Senate on the question of judges; and explain, to a lesser extent, the status of Iraq. We haven’t heard enough recently about the war, and there’s no excuse for that. The last two weeks have been extremely trying on the United States, and much of that is due to stress already pent up from Iraq woes. We need leadership and we can’t wait until the January State of the Union. A speech before Congress connotes the kind of significance for which these perilous days call.
But such a speech will only be effective in the short term. We still need massive recovery efforts to happen throughout the South. We also need a functioning Supreme Court.
On the first count—cleaning up Katrina’s mess—President Bush should do what he’s done already and will likely do often again: visit the suffering. He has shown throughout his presidency that he is indeed a compassionate conservative, and showing that compassion to folks in New Orleans and elsewhere is completely appropriate. What he shouldn’t do, and what I fear he is already doing, is pretend that Katrina’s devastation should be blamed on politics. Clearly there were numerous problems in the way local and state officials handled the system of levies in New Orleans, and obviously there were problems (likely because of the same officials) with the response to the hurricane. If the reports of the Louisiana FEMA prohibiting the Red Cross from distributing food and medical care are true, heads should roll. But it’s not the president’s job to investigate.
What Bush should do, as the most important Republican in the world, is chastise the partisanship—mainly from liberal Democrats—which Katrina has brought about. There would be nothing wrong with Bush demanding an apology from Chairman Dean. It is not partisan to question partisanship.
As for the High Court, my position on John Roberts’ quick elevation to the Chief Justice’s seat is moot. Roberts will be confirmed. But I must express my sympathy to Justices Scalia and Thomas, especially the latter. I was looking forward to “Take That, Anita” bumper stickers. Sexual harassment is a serious crime that shouldn’t be taken lightly, but there’s no evidence that Justice Thomas ever committed it.
Lovely a fellow as John Roberts is, Bush had best find someone somewhat more, well, controversial for Justice O’Connor’s replacement. The White House should probably resist the temptation to re-nominate Bork—though I think we can all agree that would make the Republican base happier than ever—but it would be nice to see at least a few Democrats unhappy. I don’t have a particular interest in the morale of Senators, but a good nominee usually makes several people upset. NOW is not really enough.
© Copyright 2005 by Isaiah Z. Sterrett
(Printer friendly version) Email: Isaiah Z. Sterrett
