Death of A Nation DVD Advertisement

Honor the Law, Not Feelings or Favoritism

email Email

Democrats opposed to the Supreme Court nomination of Neal Gorsuch cite his “legalistic” failure to show consistent favor to “the little guy” against big corporations. But Gorsuch defenders insist that an impartial judge can’t allow emotion to tilt the scales of justice.

In this, Gorsuch echoes both his mentor, Justice Scalia, and the Bible.  In Leviticus 19:15, God commands:  ”You shall not commit a perversion of justice; you shall not favor the poor, and you shall not honor the great.” Prophetic books, and the New Testament Book of Acts, make similar points, describing God as “no respecter of persons” who applies standards equally.

Traditional Jewish commentators insist on a crucial distinction between charity–which is a personal obligation to show mercy to the unfortunate–and justice–which is a communal responsibility to honor the law above feelings or favoritism.

We must, in other words, remain a nation of laws, not men; of principle, not personal preference.

email Email

Comments (10)

Leave a comment
  1. Richard Domercq  •  Mar 31, 2017 at 8:09 pm

    So well said. Clear, concise and compelling. Thanks.

  2. Frank Fried  •  Mar 31, 2017 at 8:25 pm

    So clear. So well thought out. So thanks.

  3. Greg  •  Mar 31, 2017 at 10:46 pm

    Yes, refreshing, a Supreme Court Justice whose judicial fulcrum is the Constitution. An injustice unresolved turns a balance beam into a lever. Neil Gorsuch, I believe, will keep the fulcrum centered.

  4. Harvey Homan  •  Apr 1, 2017 at 10:11 am

    As you've said, Michael, the Dems are just playing politics. Gorsuch will make a terrific jurist, period.

  5. edward wickliffe  •  Apr 1, 2017 at 2:01 pm

    It would be great if Congress represented the majority of those who elected them instead of the small special interest groups.

  6. Pat Allen  •  Apr 1, 2017 at 4:54 pm

    Well put Michael. The idea that the democrats would reject a SC justice nominee because he doesn't rule for the little guy enough shows that their respect for the impartial application of the law is non-existent. Scary stuff.

  7. Keepitreal  •  Apr 4, 2017 at 4:07 pm

    Medved plugs his wife's book, "Dont Divorce". Michael, I'll remind you, divorced his first wife. Talk about feet of clay

  8. Don't Tweet On Me  •  Apr 10, 2017 at 3:17 pm

    Keepitreal, Medved's constant informercialing of his wife's book during the non-ad segments is starting to wear on me too, but let's be fair: his divorce occurred before he made his hard religious right turns into the Leviticus-quoting Godly person he is today! I have to admit, her hubbie has aroused my interest enough to want to ask specific questions about her book:

    Does she base her arguments on quotes from Leviticus?

    Does she agree with his assertion that conspiracy theories are danger to the institution of marriage? There actually are some marriages that have occurred among the numerous researchers that worked for Mark Lane in Virginia and other JFK-conspiracy groups. One was a not-so-well-known couple that for 30 years worked as a team investigating his murder.

    Are there particular groups of Medved's listeners who need this book? Like those in the Bible Belt, which have above-average divorce rates? Or conservative activists like Steve Bannon and Gorsuch's mother?

    Are there pages in the book devoted to parents of disabled children, who have a much higher than normal divorce rate?
    Just as Gorsuch's confirmation hearings began, the Supreme Court issued a scathing rebuke of one of Gorsuch's decisions. Gorsuch violated his own stated "plain meaning" philosophy, ignoring the clear stated intent of Congress in a case involving the Individuals With Disabilities Act. This was too much for Justices Alioto and Thomas, who joined in the unanimous decision.

    And a general question about the topic of this column — are court decisions to be decided by "God says it, that settles it" Bible-quoting? Why does Medved conveniently ignore the New Testament Book of James?

  9. Rizzo  •  Apr 13, 2017 at 9:56 am

    Mr. Tweet, what you've just posted is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

  10. Rizzo  •  Apr 13, 2017 at 11:09 am


    I can't wait for this old bat to say buh-bye, and open another spot for a judge who actually, knows, understands, and respects The Constitution!

    Mistakenly identifies South Carolina's senior senator as female

Tell Us What You Think

All fields required. The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this website you agree to accept our Terms of Use.


Listen Commercial FREE  |  On-Demand
Login Join
Advertise with us Advertisement

Follow Michael

The Michael Medved Show - Mobile App

Download from App Store Get it on Google play
Listen to the show on your amazon echo devices
Michael Medved's History Store Also available on TuneIn