The American Bar Association rated Judge Robert Bork as ”exceptionally well qualified” when he was confirmed by Congress for a federal appellate judicial appointment. The Tribune in its recent editorial ”The inevitability of Robert Bork” has reviewed his illustrious record as solicitor general, acting attorney general, distinguished legal scholar and professor at Yale Law School and widely respected jurist, with journalistic objectivity.
The Tribune`s fair-minded position is in stark contrast to the fulminations of various members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who will consider the nomination. Sen. Paul Simon called for a filibuster against the appointment based on his judgment that Judge Bork was an ”idealogue.” In the highly unlikely event that Simon`s presidential campaign is successful, we can be quite sure that he would nominate judges from the left in conformity with his own ideology. The sitting President (who in this instance carried 49 of the 50 states) has the prerogative to make Supreme Court appointments. The junior senator from Illinois has the right to advise and consent on qualifications but not to guarantee that the court conforms to his own particular brand of judicial liberalism.
The real ”idealogues” are Senators Simon, Ted Kennedy, who described Judge Bork in terms more appropriate for a profile of Adolf Hitler, and Bob Packwood, who has his own personal litmus test for all public officials based on their endorsement of abortion on demand.
The confirmation of the appointment of Judge Bork has nothing to do with Watergate, Irangate, the 1988 presidential elections or the ambitions of Joseph Biden and Simon for higher office. Judge Bork`s qualifications are impeccable; he should be confirmed in time to fill out the court for the fall term.
