JACKSON - It's about abortion, not race.
While the noise about the nomination and eventual renomination of Mississippi U.S. District Judge Charles Pickering to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has been primarily about race, that's not the real reason liberal senators from the West Coast and the Northeast oppose him.
Based on his status as an evangelical Christian and former president of the Mississippi Baptist Convention, national liberal opposition to Pickering is about his stance - at least the perception of his stance - on abortion. That's why the Ted Kennedys and the Hillary Clintons in the Senate and the rest of the Democratic Party's pro-choice lobby won't stop talking about race when they mention Pickering's nomination.
Playing the race card on Pickering is an easy play indeed for the pro-choice lobby. Pickering's a Mississippian, a Friend of Trent, a born-again Christian and once wrote a paper examining the state's interracial marriage laws. Oh, yes, and he once questioned Al Gore's brother-in-law about the fairness of federal sentencing guidelines in a cross-burning case in which the least guilty defendant seemed to be getting the lion's share of the punishment.
In America today, that's apparently enough to get one branded a racist. Forget the fact that Pickering battled the Ku Klux Klan in the bad old days, forget that he was proactive in helping to lead state efforts at racial reconciliation, forget all of that.
The pro-choice lobby has Pickering in its sights. It's easier to demonize someone on a false charge of racism than it is to deal forthrightly with the fact that Republicans and Democrats don't agree on the abortion issue.
The New York Times, in parroting U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer's recent attacks on the Bush administration's judicial nominees that include Pickering, recently claimed that the right to legal abortions in America was in "dire peril." Indeed, when Democrats controlled the Senate two other Bush judicial nominees were rejected based on the abortion issue.
The pattern is clear.
Senate Democrats said Texas Judge Priscilla Owen had been an anti-abortion judicial activist whose opinions and rulings were overly influenced by her personal beliefs. Utah law professor Michael McConnell - another Bush nominee to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals - was pounded by Senate Democrats for his anti-abortion advocacy and conservative views.
Don't think abortion is the root of Pickering's troubles? Here's what the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League has to say on the question in a Web-posted "fact" sheet:
"Currently, the 5th Circuit has a 9-to-5 majority of Republican-nominated judges.
"Upon confirmation of three pending Bush nominees, this court will consist of 12 Republican and five Democratic appointees. The seven-seat majority for Republican-nominated judges will affect the balance literally for decades.
"Ultra-conservative nominees to the 5th Circuit will do far more harm than on other circuit courts that are closer to philosophical parity," the group said.
In Pickering's case, false charges of racism are the handle pro-choice forces are using to pick up the suitcase of their opposition to the judge on grounds of his religion and stance on abortion.
Apparently, conservative judges should keep their pro-life "personal beliefs" out of judicial decisions. One has to wonder, however, if a judge's pro-choice "personal beliefs" are an equal constitutional danger in the minds of Senate Democrats. Doubtful.
