Writing over at Slate (h/t Joel Pollak), Judge Richard Posner of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit states that he no longer desires the application of the United States Constitution within the American legal system:
And on another note about academia and practical law, I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries – well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments). Eighteenth-century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture, technology, etc., of the 21st century. Which means that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post – Civil War amendments (including the 14th), do not speak to today. David Strauss is right: The Supreme Court treats the Constitution like it is authorizing the court to create a common law of constitutional law, based on current concerns, not what those 18th-century guys were worrying about.
In short, let’s not let the dead bury the living.
This isn’t the first time Posner has embarrassed the judiciary, but it is certainly his most irresponsible public statement. It also proves, since he was appointed by former president Ronald Reagan, that conservatives have a terrible track record – perhaps worse than liberals – when it comes to the quality of their judicial choices.
How Posner has escaped impeachment this long remains a mystery, since his ongoing commentaries while remaining on the bench are a textbook example of bringing the administration of justice into disrepute.
In 2012, he said he has “become less conservative since the Republican Party started becoming goofy.” This, of course, openly mixes partisan politics with the judiciary, which is a very immature move. Furthermore, it should cause individuals who are known members of the GOP to feel that Posner will be biased against them if he is to preside over their case. For a sitting judge to declare a mainstream political party as “goofy” is truly reprehensible.
His pro-authoritarian police state views on the power of the government to intrude into all aspects of private life is frightening: