Empathetic Justice is Not Justice

The two attacks of domestic terrorism this past week and the nomination of empathetic Latina judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court give us the opportunity to explain clearly why leftism is wrong and has no business being the basis of ANY government; especially a government that was supposedly established to maximize individual liberty and prevent the tyranny of any group.

Judge Sotomayor and President Obama believe that blind justice based upon the rule of law is unfair and not to be chosen over the "justice" of those who identify with the struggles and oppressed feelings of certain preferred groups. Instead of wearing a blindfold, Lady Justice should wear tinted glasses that permits her to peek into the race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, backgrounds and life experiences of those who appear before her.

The murder of George Tiller and the shooting of two military recruiters is, quite frankly, very similar from a factual perspective. Both shooters were religious extremists. Both shooters were anti-government. One shooter was violently anti-abortion, the other shooter was violently anti-military. Both shooters appear to have acted with premeditation and deliberation. Empathy, leftist styled empathy, would view the shooters and the crimes very differently.

First, George Tiller was a hero to the Left. I'm not sure how killing babies later than other abortionists makes you a hero, but then again, I'm not a leftist. William Long and Quinton Ezeagwula were soldiers. If you ask Janet Napolitano that makes them one step away from being domestic terrorists themselves. Therefore, on the leftist empathy scale, Dr. Mengele, I mean Tiller, is more worthy.

Dr. Tiller's suspected murderer, Scott Roeder, was anti-government because of his views regarding tax policy and government control over American citizens. Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad is anti-government because of its military power and most likely because of perceived racism. Thus, to the leftist mind, actually the leftist heart, (I'm not sure leftists have minds) Muhammad's anger is understandable.

Roeder is white, Muhammad is black, so much of what Muhammad did can be blamed on rich white people rather than placed at his door. Further, leftists know that everyone who opposes abortion is violent and Muslims have been driven to their violence by American policies.

If we use Judge Sotomayor's reasoning, should both shooters be found guilty, Roeder would be entitled to a harsher sentence than Muhammad. And yes, if I were a judge and relied upon my sympathies and empathy, I might reach the opposite result.

That is precisely why empathy has no place on the bench. Judges are supposed to be impartial in their application of the law. If you're watching the Lakers vs. the Magic, you don't want to see the referees wearing a Lakers jersey. President Obama and Judge Sotomayor believe that a judge's prejudices, as long as they are the correct kind of prejudices, make him or her a better judge. In other words, President Obama doesn't want judges, he wants "enlightened" philosopher kings using the bench to advance toward a tyrannical utopia.

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment says,"no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". Article VI of the Constitution says, "...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...." Nowhere does the Constitution promise empathy or require an oath to be empathetic. It does, however, promise equal protection and requires Presidents and judges to swear to support the Constitution.

You can't be bound by the Equal Protection Clause and rule on the basis of empathy. Either you support the rule of law or the rule of your own subjective empathy. You can't do both.