Another Rose Bird?

John Seiler:

Here’s my criterion for justices to the California Supreme Court: That they be good justices. That’s it. I don’t care about their race, their creed, their color, their sex. They could be Martians.

Just: Interpret the California Constitution — and, when necessary, the U.S. Constitution — according to the actual words, not according to some nutty judicial philosophy, whether liberal or conservative.

Looks like that’s not what we’re going to get from Gov. Jerry Brown. According to Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, who talked with him, “He’s interested in ethnic diversity, he’s looking at academic professor types and also for someone young who will stay a while.”

Not a word about the judicial temperament of the new justice. Nothing about following the state and U.S. constitutions. Nothing about having even a drop of “good old common horse sense,” a quality that my late father, a district judge in Michigan for 25 years, said was essential to being a good judge.

So we’ll get another ideologue who will twist the law to fit the straightjacket of the regnant legal ideology of cultural Marxism.

So we’ll get another Rose Bird, an appointment when Jerry last was governor so bad she was kicked off the court by voters.

Appropriately, the state Supreme Court is housed in the Earl Warren Building and Courthouse (pictured above), named after the California governor and attorney general who helped put more than 100,000 innocent Japanese-American citizens into concentration camps. Warren said at the time, “”When we are dealing with the Caucasian race we have methods that will test the loyalty of them. But when we deal with the Japanese, we are on an entirely different field.”

This racist is the model for “justice” in California. Below is a poster ordering the loyal Japanese-Americans into the camps. Notice that it deports to the camps “both alien and non-alien.” There’s another word for “non-alien”: citizen.

Feb. 10, 2011

6 comments

Write a comment
  1. David in Irvine
    David in Irvine 10 February, 2011, 15:08

    John- you probably know this better than I can recall, but didn’t the west coast newspapers support the internment, with the exception of The Santa Ana Register? (The more things change,…huh?) I was thinking about what the LA Times editors may have opined in 1942 on this internment when a few weeks ago in response to the the TSA groping issue they said “Shut up and accept it”.

    Reply this comment
  2. John Seiler
    John Seiler 10 February, 2011, 15:54

    David,

    Yes, you are correct. The Register’s then-owner, R.C. Hoiles, was one of the few newspaper editors in the country to oppose the internment, and the only one on the West Coast. Steven Greenhut, our editor, wrote a great article on it 2 years ago:
    http://www.freedompolitics.com/articles/many-48-government-discretion.html

    Reply this comment
  3. ExPFC Wintergreen
    ExPFC Wintergreen 10 February, 2011, 16:34

    I think it is a stretch to call Earl Warren a racist. I would heartily agree he was a government-centric liberal, but not a racist. It was wartime, and however misguided, I believe that at the time the majority of jurists, politicians,military and others in positions of responsibility for public safety felt that, in the wake of the attacks on Pearl Harbor, that the security of the country required measures that were distasteful, but necessary, and temporary. I wasn’t even alive then, so I wouldn’t know. Remember, this was before the age of political correctness, which has swung the pendelum so far the other way that REAL and PRESESNT dangers to the national security are sent through the TSA security lines carte blanche.

    Reply this comment
  4. Vivek Golikeri
    Vivek Golikeri 27 February, 2012, 16:01

    Earl Wareen explicitly said: “When we deal with the Caucasian race, we have methods that will test the loyalty of them. But when we deal with the Japanese, that is an entirely different field.” That remark is not hearsay but public record. And yet Ex-PFC Wintergreen claims that Warren and others were not racist, just misguided?

    Calling the internment an unfortunate mistake is like calling a date rape an error in communication. We have a mountain of evidence involving blatantly racist comments. Moreover, the fact that Eskimoes and Aleut Indians from Alaska were also interned proves beyond question that it was racism. Such excuse-making has the same relationship with Holocaust Denial that first degree murder has with manslaughter. Except that the Nisei were not murdered, that is also exactly the difference between the internment and Hitler’s persecution of the Jews ———- a difference of degree.

    Reply this comment
  5. Vivek Golikeri
    Vivek Golikeri 27 February, 2012, 16:23

    Incidentally, I have heard this same “that was an unfortunate mistake” dodge from Iranian persons about the Tehran embassy hostage crisis. That Ayatollah Khomeini had lied to the people that an “American and Zionist” mass invasion of Iran was imminent, and that the embassy was a “nest of spies” that would serve as a Trojan Horse for the hitlerization of Iran. That hysteria caused their savagery toward our blindfolded hostages.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply



Related Articles

‘Ghost guns’ could be an apparition in CA

When 3D-printed guns first emerged on the scene, many predicted the “ghost guns” could render the regulation of guns pointless.

CA SEIU poised to break new ground on political thuggery

The California SEIU’s thuggishness is a matter of record. SEIU leaders think nothing of openly discussing their plans to monkey-wrench

Southern CA ‘Bonfire of the vanities’

July 11, 2013 By Katy Grimes Whenever environmental or social justice activists want something banned, they create a health or