|
John
Ashcroft, A.G. A.G. |
|
|
|
by John Tyler Connoley |
|
July 20, 2004 |
|
|
|
Among my friends, I'm one of a handful of people who thought John Ashcroft might make a good Attorney General when he was first nominated. As Bush announced that this former Missouri Senator and Assemblies of God member would be his pick for Department of Justice head, my friends were panic-stricken. Particularly my liberal Christian and formerly-Christian friends were almost hysterical -- An A.G. A.G.! God, save us from your followers! I tried to calm their
fears. "Yes, he's a Pentecostal fundamentalist, but he's also a
libertarian Republican," I pointed out. "He has a reputation for
being anti-big government and pro-states' rights. That's just the sort of man
I'd want in that position." I think it's time to admit
I was wrong. Once he became Attorney
General, John Ashcroft seems to have decided that even though we shouldn't
normally trust the Federal Government, we can trust the government now that
he's in charge. Once he had the power, his innate paternalism took center
stage. So, I'm publicly admitting that having an A.G. A.G., however
libertarian he might have seemed beforehand, has been an unmitigated disaster
for states' rights and civil liberties. One of the first things
Ashcroft did after taking office was to spend $8,000 to drape the statue of
Lady Justice in the DOJ pressroom. The neoclassical sculpture has an exposed
breast, and Ashcroft's critics say he didn't want to be photographed in front
of another boob. More likely, he wanted to protect Americans from seeing a
metal breast during the six o'clock news. It was his first act of paternalism
as Attorney General, but it wouldn't be his last. Much has also been made of
John Ashcroft's proposal on September 10, 2001 to cut the Justice
Department's terrorism budget. However, I think it more troubling that less
than one month after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when his priorities should
have been on other things, John Ashcroft took the time to issue a directive
stating his opinion that Oregon's Death with Dignity Act, passed by the
legislature and approved by the voters, was illegal under federal law. In the
directive, he announced his intention to prosecute physicians by using the
Oregon law's requirement that doctors file a report with the Oregon Division
of Health whenever they participate in a physician assisted suicide. He
ordered his agents to use the legal reports as evidence in prosecutions. Of course, the directive
and the ensuing investigations resulted in a lawsuit challenging the A.G.'s
right to undermine a state law. And, after hundreds of wasted hours and countless
wasted dollars, a judge ruled against the Attorney General on April 17, 2002.
In his scathing opinion, US District Judge Robert Jones stated that John
Ashcroft had tried to "stifle an ongoing, earnest and profound debate in
the various states concerning physician-assisted suicide." In other
words, Ashcroft's pro-life beliefs trumped any interest he had in states'
rights. His pro-life beliefs
trumped his interest in civil liberties earlier this year, when he subpoenaed
the medical records of hospitals in New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Ann
Arbor. He was interested in the records of women who had undergone the
procedure commonly known as partial birth abortion, because he wanted to
prove that it is never medically necessary. Of course, the hospitals balked
at the request, citing patients' right to privacy. And now the Department of
Justice is spending time in court, to justify Ashcroft's actions yet again. John Ashcroft also
announced this spring that he would soon be spending vast amounts of national
resources and DOJ time to rid the Internet of obscenity. The Justice
Department has worked diligently for years to thwart child pornography, and
that's commendable, but now the Attorney General is targeting the adult
entertainment industry with a war on pornography. Realizing that obscenity
cases, which require a jury to determine what constitutes obscene material,
would be hard to win in Hollywood, Ashcroft decided to try a case against
California executives in Pennsylvania by using laws against mailing obscene
material. If the strategy succeeds, we can expect a landslide of obscenity
cases against businesses that are currently legal in the states where they
reside. It makes me wonder what happened to the Senator Ashcroft who once
believed in states' rights. But we're just beginning
to learn the details of the most egregious expansion of federal powers
instituted by the former senator. According to news reports, a fifty-page
memo, written by lawyers from the Department of Justice and approved by
Ashcroft in 2002, stated that a wartime President has the authority to
override state and federal laws regarding torture, including the Geneva
Convention treaties ratified by Congress. Ashcroft has so far refused to show
the policy report to Congress, but if the allegations are true it would be
big-government at its worst and most dangerous. No president should be above
the law, and no threat is so dangerous that we should give the Executive
Branch dictatorial power to combat it. Any true conservative would tell you
that. Five years ago, John
Ashcroft might have said so himself. That's why I once trusted that this
libertarian Republican, and Pentecostal fundamentalist might actually make a
good Attorney General. Unfortunately, when given the power, our A.G. A.G.
betrayed my trust. It turns out he thinks states' rights and civil liberties
are dispensable. And he may even believe some people are above the law. |
|
|
|
|
Copyright © 2004
by John Tyler Connoley
|
|
All
Rights Reserved |