Stopping a judicial conflict of interest, that’s the title of an op-ed in yesterday’s edition of the Boston Globe where the author makes the audacious proposal that Catholic judges be barred from ruling on cases involving abortion.
Not surprisingly, the impetus for this suggestion is the nomination of John Roberts, who happens to be Catholic, to the Supreme Court and the potential that he may be a decisive vote in future Court rulings on abortion.
When judges may derive a financial gain from the outcome of a case before them, they must disqualify themselves; this requirement should be even more urgent when the gain in question is full Communion and the promise of eternal life. According to the American Bar Association’s Code of Conduct for United States Judges, Canon 3, Section C 1 (c), a judge must disqualify himself when he has ‘a financial interest . . . or any other interest that could be affected substantially by the outcome of the proceeding.” Maintaining one’s membership in the church and the prospect of eternal life surely count as such an interest
Ummm, no it can’t. There is a definite difference between a judge who is, for example, a shareholder in XYZ Corporation being barred from hearing cases involving that corporation and a judge being barred from hearing cases on a certain topic simply because his Church holds an opinion on the issue. Does this mean that a Jewish judge should be barred from hearing cases involving Neo-Nazis, or that an African-American Judge should be barred from hearing cases involving the Klan ?
Of course, I doubt the author would ever make such an argument. Its only because Judge Roberts is Catholic that this is even being discussed. The fact that it is being discussed in the Boston Globe, the newspaper of record in one of the most Catholic cities in America, is even more surprising.
It is obvious that mandatory disqualification of Catholic judges from abortion cases would have only the most minor effect on their professional lives. Everyone agrees that people like Justice Antonin Scalia and Roberts are fully able to fairly adjudicate 99 percent of the cases that come before them.
But why stop at abortion cases ? The same logic could be used to bar Catholic judges from ruling on cases involving contraceptives and the death penalty, two other issues on which the Catholic Church has taken rather emphatic stands. Heck, keep it up and about the only cases Catholic judges would be allowed to hear would be traffic cases.
As I’ve said before, there seems to be a lot of anti-Catholic bigotry rearing its head in the Roberts nomination. The ironic thing that I’m noticing is that, this time, the bigotry is coming from the left.
The author of the Boston Globe piece may be surprised to hear this, but the Founding Fathers have already expressed an opinion on his suggestion that Catholic Judges be treated differently. In Article VI, Clause 3 of the Constitution it states:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States
That seems to me to close debate on this rather stupid suggestion.
Update: The Q and O Blog has more to say on this issue.
Update # 2: My buddy Raymond has some excellent words on this issue as well.
Update # 3: Even more insightful comments on this issue, with discussion of the anti-Catholic bigotry that used to infect American politics, over at Right Wing Nuthouse.
