Barrett: Disregard for Constitution likely to get Kagan confirmed

"You do what you think is right and let the law catch up." - The late Justice Thurgood Marshall's notorious description of his job. (If you don't understand why that isn't what judges are supposed to do, you might want to stop reading now.)

Extolling her mentor, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan wrote that in Justice Marshall's view, "constitutional interpretation demanded, above all else, one thing from the courts: it demanded that the courts show a special solicitude for the despised and disadvantaged."

Just an observation about one man's jurisprudence? Hardly. It is a philosophy to which Ms. Kagan enthusiastically subscribes: Justice Marshall's "vision of the Court and Constitution ... remains a thing of glory," she wrote in the same piece.

In a Senate that respected the Constitution, equal justice and the separation of powers, Ms. Kagan's activist intent would kill her nomination overnight. Instead, the very reason she should never be confirmed is the reason she probably will be: She has no interest in upholding the Constitution.

Nothing would more surprise and horrify the Democrats who plan to confirm her than if she obeyed the oath of office, which reads, "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me ... under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."

You cannot, as a judge, "do equal right to the poor and to the rich" and simultaneously "show a special solicitude" to some and not others. Senate Democrats and Ms. Kagan know which of those principles she will apply. She will embrace "evolving standards of decency" and all that "living Constitution" bilge. That's why they like her.

It's an ironic thing, by the way, that "living Constitution." It means a Constitution whose words have no stable meaning because they are discarded when obeying them would not yield the desired result for preferred classes of people. What say its promoters have the grace to call that what it is: a dead Constitution.

Biden disciplines uppity taxpayer

So Joe Biden goes into a shop in Wisconsin for some frozen custard. He asks what he owes, and the manager says if the vice president will just push for lower taxes, they can call it even.

It's the kind of civic exchange that takes place every day between ordinary people and politicians looking for a photo op.

But Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. is a very important person, and not one to let a mere taxpayer sass him or question the administration's tax policies. With no hint of humor - and still stuffing his face with free custard - the vice president of the United States told the manager to stop "being a smart --- all the time."

What a perfect metaphor for the federal government: eager to live off the fat of the free market (literally, in this case) but ready to smack down the first ingrate who politely asks to keep a bit more of what he earns.

Who elected whom here, and who's the "public servant"?

Is this administration so far gone that it thinks tax relief is outside the realm of civil debate, or that any constituent who brings it up is just being mouthy? Does the vice president believe it's OK to talk that way to the people who put him in office? Does he think we're his fellow citizens or his subjects?

Prayer and poker

The first paragraph of an Associated Press article: "Members of a small Indian tribe on New York's Long Island were celebrating with prayers and song Tuesday after receiving notification ... that it has been formally recognized as a tribe."

And the second paragraph: "The recognition moves the Shinnecock Indian tribe a step closer to operating a casino ... ."

Hey, nothing makes Indian rituals more meaningful than a little blackjack, right?

Upcoming Events