HuffPo Features Saperstein Piece on Judiciary

About | Submissions | Contact

topics

Torah

Defining Reform

Jewish History

Jewish Living

Community

Social Action

Israel/World

Holidays

Shabbat

Lifecycle

Youth & Family

College Life

Books

BOOKS & MUSIC

Inside Intermarriage:
A Christian Partner's Perspective on Raising a Jewish Family
by Jim Keen
(URJ Press)

The Torah: A Women's Commentary
(URJ Press)

Union for Reform Judaism

HuffPo Features Saperstein Piece on Judiciary
February 20, 2009
Social Action (5 comments)

By Kate Bigam
(Originally posted on the RACblog)
Kate Bigam is the Press Secretary at the Religious Action Center.

If you're like most of the RAC staff, you've got enough blogs plugged into your Google Reader to keep you busy for hours at a time just reading through daily posts. But here's one piece of reading you should make sure you get to today - Rabbi David Saperstein, the RAC's director, has a piece up today on Huffington Post about the significance of the judiciary!

In "Our Rights in Peril: The Future of the Courts," Rabbi Saperstein discusses the importance of the judiciary in making crucial decisions that affect our everyday lives, even when we feel far removed from the court process - and details the potential dangers of a future Supreme Court that leans more conservatively than the present. For both these reasons, he encourages progressive religious organizations to follow the Reform Movement's lead in "creating formal processes for considering whether to oppose and support judicial nominees." Rabbi Saperstein writes:

It is far past time for the religious community to join the many progressive organizations that are fighting for a fair and independent judiciary. Sitting out vital debates about judicial nominees jeopardizes the crucial gains we have made and will make in the legislative arena. We need to ensure the appointment of judges who will uphold an expansive interpretation of the law as it applies to our fundamental rights and the separation of church and state.

Don't take my word for it - check out Rabbi Saperstein's Huffington Post piece for yourself, and then click on through to the RAC's page on Judicial Nominations to learn more about what we're doing and, of course, what you can do. There, you'll find resources like background information, key terminology, URJ resolutions and the RAC's latest publication on judicial nominations, titled Rights in Peril: Why the American Jewish Community and Others Cannot Afford to Sit Out the Debate Over Judicial Nominations.

Tags: Politics

Comment

Comments

Joseph said:

I don't think the Reform movement should take a stance on judicial nominations, or political campaigns for that matter. After all, it is supposed to be a religious movement, not an adjunct to the Democratic Party.

February 20, 2009 2:27 PM

JanetheWriter said:

When the Reform Movement takes a position on an issue (but never on a specific candidate) it does so only after a vote by one of its representative, governing bodies -- the executive committee, the board of trustees, or the Biennial General Assembly. And, even though it is a religious movement (and, I believe, because it is a religious movement), Reform Judaism has a longstanding obligation to speak out on issues of the day, particularly those that impact the poor, the disenfranchised and other less fortunate souls in our midst. And, regardless of what the positions of the Movement may be, they are in no way binding on individuals or congregations.

Shabbat shalom.

February 20, 2009 3:57 PM

Leone Baum said:

From Lee in Long Island, New York

I agree with Rabbi Saperstein.

However the way to be involved with the judiciary is to be careful and knowledgeable when electing our representatives who appoint them.

In October,2004 I was on an Elderhostel in Poland. One of our travelers was a pediatrician, retired , from Atlanta. He had left his absentee ballot with his vote cast for George W. Bush. His rationale was that it was because of Israel. He never gave a thought to the Supreme Court appointments that President Bush would be called to make, and did indeed make.. His vociferous defense of his stance resulted in a fist fight between himself and a pedritrician, a woman, also retired , from Ohio. The fact that both were well into their eighties would have made the event laughable if it were not so serious.

February 20, 2009 4:29 PM

Hinneni said:

...and there came a Joseph who knew not Pharaoh.

If our religion does not empower us, or in fact demand of us, to care about the great issues of our time and place, and to speak of them whether we are sitting in our own house or walking on our way -- then we are not a religious movement at all, but a slave society by our own choice.

While JanetheWriter may point out that the positions taken by the Reform movement are not binding on individuals or congregations, it is to our credit as a religious movement that those positions DO reflect those taken by overwhelming majorities of our congregants -- presumably in some measure because the movement reflects its members, and in some measure because it guides its members towards religiously responsible positions.

February 22, 2009 2:27 PM

Joseph said:

I support judicial nominations based on a judge's commitment to equality before the law and the principles in the constituion. Supporting a judge in the hopes that he will uphold personal religious values is reminiscent of the days when we had religous qualifications for holding public office. If a writer from the heartland said he wanted judges who upheld Christian values in their rulings, there would be cries about religious fundamentalism taking over the government. We should demand the same church-state separation from our own movement that we expect from others.

February 22, 2009 3:36 PM