I long for the days when Supreme Court judges weren’t viewed as representing a particular ideology.
Having worked with Ed Stetzer for the past two years, one thing I have always appreciated about him is his willingness to deal with issues many Evangelicals avoid. His strong stance on immigration issues, the #MeToo movement, and mass incarceration is refreshing. He has used his platform in Evangelicalism to point out disparities in Evangelical approaches to those issues—issues I would say are key to gospel witness in this world.
As a Christian person of color, however, I approach Brett Kavanaugh, our President’s most recent nominee for the Supreme Court, with a bit less enthusiasm than my colleague. Besides the fact that the President missed the opportunity to change the narrative of a court dominated by white male appointments (only six of the 113 judges in the court’s 228-year history have been minorities or women), I long for the days when Supreme Court judges weren’t viewed as representing a particular ideology.
In grade school, I learned early about the system of checks and balances that help make our democracy a government for the people and by the people. As a lawyer, I know the vital role of the judiciary in interpreting the laws of the land.
In fact, landmark decisions like Brown vs. Board of Education, where the Court struck down segregation laws as “inherently unequal,” have had a profound and positive impact on American society.
But in recent decades our country has replaced checks and balances with political posturing—on both sides of the aisle.
Never before in history has our country been so divided politically. In the past, Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court justices were informative and valuable in determining a judge’s fitness to serve in this critical …