CP-GA Masthead
  Register   Log In 
Welcome
Support the Party
About the Party
Events
Hot Topics
Media Central
Contact Us
Elections
Library
CP-GA Store
Login
Hot Topics > Judicial Tyranny >  Returning Customers
click here to log in.
 
 
Hot Topics
Religious Liberty
Limited Government
John Roberts: A Safe Pick, But How Sound?
Constitution Party Denounces Supreme Court's Ten Commandments Decision
Press Release: Constitution Party of Georgia Supports SR 595
Legislative Review: The Constitution Restoration Act Of 2004
Constitution Party Denounces Verdict of Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas
Blame The GOP For The Pro-Sodomy Court Decision
Righteousness or Republicanism?
Where's the Pro-Life Outrage?
"American View" Show Exposes Pro-Abortion View Of John Roberts, Hear It Now
Media Alert: Moral Issues & Concerns radio talk show interview
Education
Sanctity of Life

Jay Sekulow: Is He Trying To Serve Two Masters In A House Divided?

John Lofton takes a look at the how the "Religious Right" talks about stopping judicial tyrants but then enables them

May 26, 2005

One of the problems plaguing the so-called "Religious Right" is that instead of pressing the Bush Administration to enact a truly American Constitutionalist agenda, certain "leaders" have been too close to the Republican Party and thus have been blocking real change. A case-in-point is Jay Sekulow, head of Pat Robertson's "American Center For Law & Justice."

A recent front-page story in the "Wall Street Journal" was headlined: "Crowd Control/In Judge Battle, Mr. Sekulow Plays A Delicate Role/Lawyer Rallies Evangelicals On Filibuster Issue, Keeps Them From Boiling Over/Lessons From The Schiavo Case."

This report told how, on one of Sekulow's radio shows, "callers suggested cutting off funding to the courts or impeaching judges responsible for offensive decisions." Such actions, of course, are not only needed but also are thoroughly constitutional.

But, according to the "Journal," Sekulow tried to cool such passions and "batted away" these ideas. This article describes his role as "channeling the anger of the religious right without letting it boil over….[he] is building a bridge between passion-driven activists and pragmatic Washington insiders."

On another one of his radio broadcasts, when a caller from Iowa questioned the lifetime appointments of judges, Sekulow reportedly changed the subject to judicial nominations and away from punishing out-of-control judges. He said, in part, to his caller: "I'm not in favor of impeaching a judge because you disagree with the opinion they held --- even if you strongly disagree."

In other words, Sekulow is working to prevent what must be done to stop judicial tyrants: abolish their courts, restrict their jurisdictions or impeach them.

The "Journal" notes that Sekulow is part of a group that has been "coordinating closely with the White House." They have met in the Old Executive Office Building next to the White House with, among others the White House's public liaison. The members of this group, it is said, "have friends in the Bush Administration whom they regularly update." The head of the grass-roots arm of Sekulow's group is Gary Marx, a man who in the 2004 campaign was the Bush-Cheney national conservative coalition director who helped organize church-sponsored voter drives in Ohio.

Just one example of Sekulow's Republican Party cheerleading instead of pushing a Christian, pro-life agenda is his endorsement of Alberto Gonzales to be Attorney General BEFORE Gonzales' confirmation. He called for Gonzales' confirmation "without delay" saying he would be "an exceptional Attorney General" because he would "work to protect all Americans --- both at home and abroad."

But, in his confirmation hearing, Gonzales made it clear that he would NOT protect ALL Americans. He would NOT protect innocent, unborn human beings from being murdered by abortion. He said, regarding various Supreme Court decisions "legalizing" abortion:

"Of course, the Supreme Court has recognized a right of privacy in our Constitution, and in Roe the court held that that right of privacy includes a woman's right to choose to have an abortion. A little over a decade ago, the court, in Casey, had an opportunity to revisit that issue. They made a -- they declined to overturn Roe, and of course made a new standard that any restriction that constituted an 'undue burden' on a woman's right to choose could not be sustained. My judgment is that the court has had an opportunity -- ample opportunities -- to look at this issue. It has declined to do so. And as far as I'm concerned, it is the law of the land and I will enforce it."

So, there you have it. Jay Sekulow, supposedly an opponent of judicial activism and abortion, has enthusiastically endorsed Alberto Gonzales who has pledged to uphold Roe v. Wade, arguably the most egregious example of judicial activism ever, a ruling that had led to the slaughter by abortion of more than 40 million innocent, unborn babies.