Worthy Candidate Punished

      For Not Being a Liberal Lapdog

By Alex Rivero

Twenty-two long years ago, a seventeen-year-old boy from Honduras named Miguel Estrada arrived at the gates of America with a clear goal echoing in his mind: he was going to live to see his American dream come true, no matter what the odds were.

Not surprisingly, with a gifted mind and a unique discipline to work, Estrada would succeed. Now, at age 39 and with a long and successful resume to prove his worthiness of being named next judge to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia, congressional Democrats are looking to block Estrada’s nomination using any necessary means.

            In what appears to be a frustrated attempt primarily by Democratic Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT.), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Hillary Clinton (D-NY) to deny the Honduran’s rightfully deserved position among his elected peers, Democrats are immorally refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of a judicial candidate who, unlike others, has brilliantly overcome the challenges of a language barrier and established himself as a prime example of what it means to succeed in the United States -- the clear, simple fact that hard work and determination will lead to a fruitful future.

            In reality, people like Schumer and his clan are acting out (in action, not opinion) what left-leaning organizations such as the National Organization for Women and the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund believe in, that Estrada is “not in support of Hispanics” simply because of his conservative views. 

            The Honduran, as many see it, serves as proof to critics that minorities, who have been branded so many times as “victims of an abusive society”, do have the capacity to successfully achieve a challenging goal in this great nation.

            Even if Estrada somehow does not serve as proof of the above, one has to acknowledge, one way or another, that he truly deserves this position.

To summarize his life in the U.S. in a matter of words, this man graduated magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from Colombia College before earning a law degree, again with high honors, from Harvard University. He has been an employee of the Justice Department in both Republican and Democratic administrations and is a member of one of the most prominent law firms in America. He has also won two-thirds of the cases he has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court.

So what on earth could possess people like Schumer, Clinton, and Leahy to hold back such a candidate, one who has worked so strenuously for everything he has acquired and has quietly climbed the legal ladder to the pinnacle of law in the U.S.?

According to these senators, Estrada has refused to answer questions posed to him about the way he would have judged certain Supreme Court cases in the past. One such question demanded that he handpick three cases within the last forty years judged by members of the Supreme Court whose outcome he disagreed with (an apparent attempt by Schumer for him to give his thought on Roe vs. Wade). However, because abortion-related cases still come before the Supreme Court, Estrada was not able to provide any personal insight into that case. He could not discuss Roe vs. Wade without violating the American Bar Association's Code of Judicial Conduct, which says that prospective judges "shall not . . . make statements that commit or appear to commit the nominee with respect to cases, controversies or issues that are likely to come before the courts."

A plausible explanation for the filibuster also might be the ‘race issue.’ Should Estrada become the newest D.C. Court of Appeals judge, Democrats would have to try to shrug off the fact that a Republican nominated him. Millions of Hispanic voters nation wide will be left with the question of why was the first ever Hispanic judge to serve on the Supreme Court bench nominated by a Republican instead of a Democrat, supposedly the most sympathetic of all politicians concerning Latino issues. Obviously, Hispanic voters in the 2004 elections will not forget Estrada’s nomination by President Bush, many of whom might even switch political parties come election time.

The fact that a Hispanic, let alone an immigrant, who arrived to this country at age seventeen and has become the protagonist in one of the happier success stories in history without the use of sneaky racial double standards irritates some Democrats. I believe it is this outspoken attitude, one that the left has proclaimed for years, that in order for Hispanics to succeed they need the aid of social groups, preferences by universities, and political activism, that has created the congressional jumble we find ourselves in today concerning Estrada’s legitimacy to proceed in the approval process.

After all, what sort of crazy world are we living in when Hillary Clinton can accuse President Bush of, as she said, “flouting the rule of law?” I suppose any day now we’ll all open a newspaper to find Starbucks angrily accusing someone else of selling coffee.

Given the shortage of an intellectually sound argument against Estrada’s nomination, if the leadership of the Republican-controlled Senate cannot bring their nominee to a vote, their “control” of Congress will be considered laughable. If President Bush does not challenge Estrada’s opponents fiercely, he will show a lack of seriousness for the oath he swore to defend our Constitution. So, in the name of the future of the United States of America, I pray that Congress not reject potential talent at a moment where it stares it in the face. Please, for the future of America, write your local Congressman or Congresswoman and plead them to vote for Miguel Estrada. Doing so will finish the last, and most deserving chapter of his already successful life story.                            

 For comments send  e-mail to:

                webmaster@cubanology.com