You are here

Dreams of impeachment

A Massachusetts state representative has indicted Chief Justice Marshall for violations of the Massachusetts Code of Judicial Conduct in connection with the “gay marriage” case. The story of how Mrs. Lewis acted out her judicial ideals is worth reading. I’m told that such an indictment is the first step in an impeachment proceeding.In fact, of course, it’s unlikely that an attempt at impeachment will get anywhere. It’s more comfortable for politicians to let things happen that have influential supporters and trust the media to put a good face on them. Still, it’s good to keep track of how things stand. Chief Justice Marshall’s actions are similar to those of other highly-placed feminist judges in cases regarding gender issues. Mark Steyn’s account of the antics of Canadian Supreme Court Justice Claire L’Heureux-Dube in his Rise of the FU Movement provides a case in point. Beyond feminists and gender, the habit of abusing the judicial process for political goals has deep roots on the Left. Felix Frankfurter’s private communications with lawyers for litigants he wanted to win—a gross violation of judicial conduct—are a notorious example.The moral? The liberal state denies its attachment to any set of substantive goods, and claims that process is everything. In reality, of course, the more process the more gaps can be found in the process, and the more avenues of manipulation become available to those who can make use of them. The basic question in politics is what goods have public authority. Questions of procedure are always secondary.



Isn’t the indictment of Chief Justice Marshall about 170 years overdue?

Notice in the linked article that three of the four justices mentioned in the “indictment” were appointed by Republicans, and Chief Justice Marshall was elevated to that position by a Republican. As is known, Republican Gov. William Weld was a liberal so it’s not too much of a surprise that half the depraved judges were appointed by him. (But, still…you have to wonder!) I thought Cellucci was more conservative, though. I guess I thought wrong. (By the way, Mrs. Lewis’ nothing-short-of-outrageous behavior while hearing the case, as reported in the indictment, made me want to vomit.)


“Chief Justice Margaret Marshall, appointed by Republican William Weld as Associate Justice, 1996, and as Chief Justice by Republican Paul Cellucci, 1999.

“Justice John M. Greaney, appointed by Democrat Michael Dukakis, 1989.

“Roderick L. Ireland, appointed by Republican William Weld, 1997.

“Judith A. Cowin, appointed by Republican Paul Cellucci, 1999.”

[With this comment I’m changing my pen name from “Unadorned” to “Fred Scrooby” (not my real name), following Lawrence Auster’s sensible suggestion that pen names of VFR posters should sound like people’s names. Scrooby is the name of the English town the Pilgrim Fathers originally came from and worshipped in.]

I read : “the habit of abusing the judicial process for political goals has deep roots on the Left”. But in Belgium (Europe) a terrible avenue of manipulation already exists. We in Belgium have the example of the Thought Police (the Agency for Equal Rights). Therefore, America, be careful with restrictions on fundamental rights! I won’t elaborate here how it could come so far in a country that claims to be “democratic”, but I will give you an example of how it works and you will understand.

The Thought Police’s board is mainly controlled by the French-speaking Walloons in combination with the Flemish left. But now by accident, the head of the board of the Catholic education system (more than two thirds of the schools) was on television trapped by an opponent by letting her say that gay teachers can better refrain in classroom to promote gay marriage. Then this little remark was taken away out of its context.

She was summoned by the Thought Police. The Thought Police is very powerful in Belgium. It’s a kind of private owned “public” prosecutor office. Their tax paid lawyers can break your career for the slightest mistake in expression, because the equal rights act in Belgium is very strict in what may be said. So to be condemned depends mainly on the “go ahead” of the Thought Police, more than on “justice”. The professional judges must simply apply the law.

Fortunately for her is that the party she belongs to does well in the polls, so that there is a small possibility that they (the Christian Democrats) will come back into power and will then be able to influence the Thought Police themselves. So this time it will only stay with intimidation. But that the Thought Police can “bite with the aim to kill” too is proven by the fact that the Vlaams Blok nationalist party (more than 20% of the votes and growing) will soon be banned (ruling in appeal : November 9, 2004).

Mr. Van Beek’s account of how the governmental thought-control apparatus works in Belgium, formerly a very democratic little country, is horrifying. That the head of that country’s board of Catholic Education could be intimidated into silence (for fear of draconian punishment if she dares to open her mouth again) for the grave offense of saying homosexual teachers shouldn’t promote homosexual “marriage” in Catholic-school classrooms is nothing short of a nightmare straight out of Orwell’s “Nineteen-eighty-four.” In his letter Mr. Van Beek is trying to warn Americans what the future holds for this country if we permit things to keep getting worse. I can only pray that we heed his warning.

Incidentally, does Mr. Van Beek know if the Vlaams Blok is finished as regards the upcoming election this month (in which they were projected to do quite well before their sudden banning)? Or is there still some way they can take part and perhaps do well? Notice that if they are finished as a party as a result of this banning, that will amount to government by judges instead of by legislatures and parliaments—which is more and more the situation we have in this country, thanks of course to the left and their CCR allies.