OPTNTTOIV Net?raskan
V_rX 1 1 1 1 £V JV 1 Thursday, Juns 17,1993
Nebraskan
Editorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Jeff Singer.Editor, 472-J 766
Jeremy Fitzpatrick.4.Features Editor
Jeff Zeleny... .Copy Desk Chief
Sam Kep field...Columnist
Anne Steyer.Staff Reporter
Ginsburg bad choice
Clinton’s decision poor for highest court
President Clinton’s nomination this week of Ruth Bader
Ginsburg to succeed the retiring Byron White on the
Supreme Court is an unwise choice.
Ginsburg, who is a moderate judge whose experience and track
record shows her as being open-minded on most issues, is an
excellent person to be a member on the court.
But this is exactly why she is one of the worst selections at this
time for the highest court in the land.
The court which is comprised of a majority of strong conserva
tives with a couple of moderates, is in one of its most lopsided
balances in history with its strong conservative emphasis.
So what does Clinton, who is the first Democratic president in
25 years to make a Supreme Court nomination, do to reverse this
conservative trend?
He appoints a justice who will do nothing to alter the makeup
of the court, yet jeopardizes the court’s ability to rule from a more
moderate perspective since the scales of justice has added a ninth
element to its conservalive/moderate plate, while the liberal plate
remains as empty as it has since the retirement of Thurgood
Marshall.
Ginsburg is exactly what one would look for if the court was
being started from scratch, but since the ingredients of an ultra
conservative cam have been brewing for years, a strong liberal
justice is what was needed to help the drive for having equal
representation on a court dominated by Republican presidential
selections.
And why did Clinton make Ginsburg his choice? Probably to
try to have one of his proposals go over smoothly for one of the
first times during his initial six months in office.
And Clinton’s traditional opponents, the Republicans in the
Senate, will not oppose the president’s choice since they could not
be more thrilled with his nomination.
“I think she’s a Democrat that even Republicans could sup
port,” said Republican Senator Charles Grasslcy of Iowa, who is a
member of the Senate Judiciary Committee that will be used to
confirm her.
But the question is: Is she a Democrat that Democrats can
support?
The answer is probably not, but the Democrats are in a Catch
22 situation, just as they were with the last addition to the court,
former President Bush’s nomination of Clarence Thomas to
replace Marshall. .
While some Democrats in the Senate might not have believed
Thomas was the best choice for a justice, they were swayed to
vote for him because they wanted to promote a racial balance on
the court.
The situation is similar with Ginsburg: She is not the best
choice for those who want to see stronger liberal representation on
the court, but since she is a Democrat, the Democrats in the
Senate will again be inclined to vote for her, primarily because of
who she is, and not for the most important factor of a justice —
what she stands for.
And while a swift confirmation process might improve
Clinton’s reputation, it is too bad the president is willing to
sacrifice the U.S.’ highest court for his own approval rating.
jaasinarrx
WELCOME
1 TO
ALCOHOLIC
&evERAQ£$
ARE
•jlRlOtY
fprwpde*
Signs of tHe Timed
Haitians deserve opportunity
My great-grandparents were
Irish immigrants to this coun
try. I am here today because
the United States was willing to take
them in and give them a chance.
Except for Native Americans, we
are all immigrants, of course. We are
all linked by the fact that our roots in
this country were planted by people
who came from other countries.
Now some Haitians immigrants
are coming to the United States. A
federal judge ruled Tuesday that the
Haitians should be released from a
camp they were being held in at
Guantanaomo Bay Naval Base in
Cuba.
The Haitians fled their homeland
aftera military coup in 1991. They are
political refugees.
They also are infected with the
HIV virus. The United States does not
accept immigrants infected with HIV,
so the refugees have been held in
Cuba for almost two years.
In his decision that the refugees
should be released, Judge Sterling
Johnson, Jr. described the camp as
“nothing more than an HIV prison
camp.”
The Haitian refugees present an
extremely difficult dilemma for the
United States on its immigration
policy. Whatever position one takes
on the issue, it cannot be easy.
On one hand, the United States has
a moral responsibility to do some
thing to help the Haitians. We preach
freedom and democracy around the
world. We must be prepared to back
up our words when it becomes neces
sary.
But legitimate concerns have been
raised that the United Stales cannot
solve all the worlds' problems or take
care of everyone who is in trouble.
Those arguments are especially ap
pealing in troubled economic times.
i
The fact that the Hai
tians have HIV has
been used to distort
the issue beyond
rational discussion.
Quarantining Amerl
' cans with HIV would
be as horrible as
doing the same thing
to Haitians.
Scare tactics have been used as
well. The fact that the Haitians have
HIV has been used to distort the issue
beyond rational discussion. Quaran
tining Americans with HIV would be
as horrible as doing the same thing to
Haitians.
However the issue is debated, the
Haitians arc coming. Nine flights will
carry 140refugees to the United Stales
this week. Once here, they will still
have to seek political asylum, which
means some of them could still be
deported.
Fearing the unknown and listening
to those voices who woujd appeal to
the darker side of human nature is an
easy temptation. It would be much
easier for us to simply shut out the
Haitians and leave them in Cuba than
to deal with the issue.
But the United States has a larger
responsibility than that, by choice and
by fate. Whether we like it of not, we
are the country that oppressed people
turn to when they need help.
Once that yearning of people to be
free helped build the United States.
The immigrants who came to the
United States when my great-grand
parents did helped make America into
a great country.
There were also voices then that
said immigrants were not wanted and
would only be a burden on the coun
try. Luckily, they were not heard.
Now oppressed people are turning to
us again, and it is only right that we
remember that our roots as a country
lie in immigration.
Would it be wise for the United
States to simply open up our borders
and invite everyone in? Of course not.
But it is important for us to remember
from where we have come.
The issue of the Haitian immi
grants and others who would come to
this country or who need our help is an
issue about what kind of people we
are.-How we treat the Haitians and
others crying out for help will deter
mine if we believe in the values we so
often say we do.
We have plenty of problems to
deal within our own shores that we
cannot ignore. But we also have the
ability to help oppressed people around
the world.
If we were in the position of the
political refugees and they were a
powerful country, would we not hope
.for their help as well?
We certainly don’t have to help
them — the choice is up to us. But if
we turn our backs on those who are in
trouble we will have to live with the
consequences of that decision—to us
and to them.
Fitzpatrick is a senior political science
major and the Summer Daily Nebraskan fea
tures editor.