[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 10]
[House]
[Page 13000]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                 DEEPLY PARTISAN BIAS ON SUPREME COURT

  (Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts asked and was given permission to address 
the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I am moved this week after 
the death of President Reagan to quote him, ``There they go again.''
  The ``they'' in question are the three extremely conservative members 
of the U.S. Supreme Court who are, of course, entitled to their extreme 
conservatism, Justices Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist; but, they are 
really not entitled to partisanship. Despite that, they have shown it.
  The Colorado Supreme Court, acting in accordance with wrong, uncon-
troversial constitutional doctrine, interpreted the Colorado 
Constitution to mean that the Colorado legislature could not reopen 
redistricting for partisan advantage 2 years after they had originally 
had redistricting in the State. It is a very strongly held doctrine in 
America that a State Supreme Court is the final arbiter of its own 
State Constitution.
  The Colorado Republicans, looking for the kind of partisan advantage 
that the Texas counties were able to get, appealed that decision to the 
U.S. Supreme Court. No one thought it was much of a serious appeal. 
Fortunately, six members of the Court held true to constitutional 
doctrine and voted not to take the case so it was not taken. But three 
members of that Court, defying long-standing constitutional tradition, 
voted to take the case. It was a case brought by Colorado Republicans 
to try to gain partisan political advantage; and surprise, surprise, 
they got the votes of Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas.
  Mr. Speaker, the worst of it is I am not sure they were being 
consciously partisan. I think the bias, the deeply partisan bias that 
has crept into those three is so strong that they, in fact, can do this 
without realizing it.
  Once again we have seen from those three justices a hypocritical 
preference for partisan advantage over the kind of constitutional 
purity that they claim to follow but rarely do.
  Mr. Speaker, I will include for the Record in the Extensions of 
Remarks an editorial from the New York Times on this subject.

                          ____________________