The War, the Economy—How About the Judges?
What the Media Isn't Calling an Election Issue
By Jessica Dorian, 09.23.04

During the last several months of presidential campaign coverage, the media have highlighted two issues of national concern: the situation in Iraq and the national economy.

If you ask anyone who watches the news which issues are important in this year’s election, most will respond with the indoctrinated answer, “why, the war and the economy, of course.”

While America’s role in the Middle East and the economic affairs in this country are forefront issues in both candidates’ campaign rhetoric, they are not the most pressing issues for the country. The media should be asking, “What about the judges?”

Joel Belz, CEO of God’s Word Publications and founder of World Magazine, is responding to this issue. In a recent World Magazine Online article, “Judgment Call,” Belz said that appointments made by the next president will impact American society for the next 30 years. “The Big Four” – as Belz calls them – on the Supreme Court are getting older, and the next president may be replacing one of them. But Belz says the other 100 or so federal judge appointments by the new president are equally important.

Stephen G. Breyer, the last addition to the Supreme Court, was appointed in 1994 – a decade ago. The odds of a new appointment in the next four years are pretty good, but the identity of the next justice will depend on the new leader in The White House. Why are these new appointments important to voters? Because Americans are engaged in a cultural war, and we are battling values and morals instituted by the U.S. Constitution.

Since Roe v. Wade in 1973, the Supreme Court has acted as the lawmaker instead of law interpreter. Judges are legislating from the bench on a wide range of social issues, such as abortion, gay rights and education.

A vocal uproar came from many citizens in March 2003, when the Supreme Court ruled against Texas sodomy laws and banned private consensual sex between same-sex adults.

According to CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin in a Nov. 18, 2003 article, “…the decision appeared to strike down most laws governing private sexual conduct, but he said laws governing marriage would be unaffected.”

Not for long. Without a doubt, as we are already seeing from the response to President Bush’s proposed Marriage Amendment, the next big judicial ruling will attack the definition of marriage—a concept that has been innately understood for thousands of years.

So many conservatives in America, who strive to protect the morals and principles that the Founding Fathers established in the Constitution, are fighting a cultural battle. And the Supreme Court and other federal courts seem to be on the opposite side.

Perhaps to a liberal media, the issues of Iraq and the economy create a helpful smokescreen, blocking what’s really at stake in the 2004 election. The social issues presently monopolizing the courts are the real priorities in the hearts and minds of both liberals and conservatives. Why is the media not reflecting and informing those concerns?