Inside Perilous Judgment: Political Corruption

Posted on March 17, 2016 in Justice, Writing Life

Official Photo of 110th Senate

Official Photo of 110th Senate

The back cover copy on my upcoming novel Perilous Judgment ends with a question:

…how far is he [Edward Lamport] willing to venture into the dark recesses of political corruption to save his son?

Political corruption…the words conjure up back room deals, payoffs by lobbyists, extralegal maneuvers by Congress and the Executive branch, and anything else the mind of an ambitious politician—or a novelist—can imagine.


How about this for political corruption: making the Constitution the game ball.


The corruption Edward Lamport ventures into? You’ll need to read Perilous Judgment to find out.

Meanwhile, how about this for corruption: making the Constitution the game ball.

Oval Office

Oval Office

The kerfuffle over President Obama’s nomination of a successor to the late Justice Antonin Scalia didn’t start with his untimely passing. The so-called “Biden Rule” being invoked by the current leadership of the Senate (now there’s irony for you) was a point of view (not rule) presented in 1992 during Senate proceedings by then Senator Joe Biden that President George H.W Bush should consider not nominating a Supreme Court justice to a vacant position during the summer of his last year in office, and that the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings until after the political campaign season was over.

Biden went on to predict that the 1992 presidential campaign would be “one of the bitterest, dirtiest presidential campaigns we will have seen in modern times.”

Prophetic, huh?

Article II, Section 2, paragraph 3 of the Constitution states:

Supreme Court Chamber

Supreme Court Chamber

“He [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint…Judges of the supreme Court…”

The process allows for the Senate’s advice and consent to be “no.” Inaction is not advice.

I’m not a lawyer or Constitutional scholar. One doesn’t have to be to know that if the current sitting President and the Senate majority were of the same political party we wouldn’t be hearing anything from Washington about “the people having a say in the Court’s direction.”

Of course it’s about winning elections and amassing more power.

So is all other political corruption.


Comments