Posted on: Saturday, May 21, 2005
COMMENTARY
Judicial fight: It's about moving backward
By Ellen Goodman
I'm not keen on the politics of destruction, let alone the language of destruction. If I hear about the "nuclear option" one more time, I think I will go ballistic. Nuclear warnings should be reserved for the real thing, like say, North Korea.
It's not that I approve of the attempt by Republicans to change the rules. The filibuster was once lampooned as a weapon of obstruction. Now it's been revamped as a weapon of moderation, the one thing that makes a president think about the wide appeal of a judicial candidate.
But what I find most intriguing in the entire Republican fandango isn't the military, it's the chivalry. If I were coming up with a handle for this debacle, it would be "Ladies First."
It is not an accident that the Republicans have chosen to charge ahead with two female nominees. As Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown sat silently at a Senate photo op, Sen. Bill Frist described them gallantly as "two fine women." His spokes-man talked about them as "accomplished women with compelling life stories."
The assumption behind the Ladies First strategy is that it's harder for liberals to oppose two women, one an African-American, than two white guys like William Pryor and William Myers. The assumption also is that it's harder for the public to see women as right-wing extremists.
I must confess to a certain admiration for an administration that has managed to find a rainbow coalition of ideologically monochromatic people. It can't always be easy.
Consider Brown, the daughter of an Alabama sharecropper and the most conservative member of the California Supreme Court. The pool of African-American professional women who occupy the far right has the depth of a puddle. Some 90 percent of African-American college graduates voted for Kerry in the last election. Out of 218 African-American state legislators, 214 are Democrats.
Owen may come from larger demographic waters. But among single professional female law-yers of a certain age, conservatives are still in the shallow end.
After reading about these two nominees, a friend e-mailed me: "Where do they find these women?" The short answer is that they found them serving on the Supreme Courts of their respective states.
The longer answer? Sen. Frist defends their mainstream credentials by saying that Owen was elected to the bench by 84 percent and Brown retained by 76 percent. Opponents counter by saying that Owen was boosted by none other than Karl Rove and that Brown barely squeaked by the American Bar Association with the lowest qualified rating. Owen had only token opposition in her election, Brown had none.
As for the ideology riverways, they are in a rightward eddy. Owen is best known as a friend of corporations. She's most infamous for her view, in a parental notification case, that no matter what the law said, a teenager shouldn't get a judicial bypass unless she understood religious objections to abortion.
Janice Brown turns out to be the Ann Coulter of the judiciary. She has taken endless opportunities to pepper speeches and opinions with concerns about everything from affirmative action as "segregation" to the New Deal regulations as "the triumph of our own socialist revolution."
The GOP apparently has an affirmative action program for women and minorities who don't believe in affirmative action. That's not new since these days being a conservative woman and a reactionary of color is a great job opportunity whether you are Ann Coulter or Alan Keyes.
There is bound to be ambivalence among those who want to see more women and minorities rise. I disagree with Condoleezza Rice's policies far more often than I agree, but I feel a certain delight watching Middle Eastern potentates deal with a powerful American woman.
But there are also echoes here of the Clarence Thomas story. Remember when some senators put Thomas' biography over his ideology? One man didn't: Thomas.
Are women like Owen and Brown entitled to their opinions? Absolutely. They are not required to follow a story line, a party line or a gender line. When the first wave of activists breaks down barriers, most of them share the same experiences and political view. Part of the success is opening doors for everyone.
The going gets tough when that "everyone" includes people who would unravel their ideals. At that point, the sisterhood (or brotherhood) is no longer required to rally around.
Ladies First is a fine gambit. But we can't baptize Owen and Brown with the water of the mainstream because of their race, gender or compelling life story. It's not about where these women come from, but where they would lead us. It's not about skirts. It's about robes.
Ellen Goodman is a Boston-based writer on modern social issues.
