Among Mitt Romney’s closest advisers is failed Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork. Bork serves as the co-chair to Romney’s “Judicial Advisory Committee” and offers a unique look into the kind of constitutional beliefs Romney holds dear.
So, just what kind of constitutional worldview is Romney embracing with his adviser Bork? For starters, Bork has described the federal ban on whites-only lunch counters as “unsurpassed ugliness” and believes contraception should be illegal. In fact, Bork is just fine with an outright criminal ban on sex all together.
It should come as no surprise then that Bork, and presumably Romney, believes the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause should no longer apply to women. Why? Simple. Women make up a majority of students in college so clearly have conquered all societal discrimination.
I’d point out all the ways that Bork is wrong in that belief, including the need for the Lilly Ledbetter Act and the depressing census statistics that prove Bork wrong, but that would be a waste of time for someone who amounts to a legal has-been. Instead, I’m going to be grateful that Bork never made it onto the Court and remind anyone I can that the 2012 presidential elections are more about the Supreme Court than ever.
So, just how comfortable are you with Robert Bork making judicial recommendations to a President Romney?
Photo from gage skidmore via flickr.