Bryan Fischer
Senator Craig's decision creates problems for everyone
By Bryan Fischer
Judge Charles Porter's ruling against Senator Craig's effort to withdraw his guilty plea was about as much of a legal smackdown as it is possible to deliver. The judge nailed down all four corners of the coffin and left the senator virtually no legal wiggle room of any kind.
It seems likely that he will appeal, but the judge's clearly written, tightly argued and emphatically concluded opinion means that it is almost a certainty that he will lose at the next level as well.
But if he intends to stay in Congress, he may have no choice. Virtually the only way he can justify staying in office is to claim that he is waiting until the legal process has run its course.
If he chooses to appeal, his appeal is unlikely to be heard until well into 2008. The process by which each side prepares its legal briefs alone usually takes a minimum of 100 days, which takes matters into mid-to-late January.
It can take several more months to schedule arguments and for a decision to be reached. Thus the Court of Appeals process will buy the senator time until the spring of 2008.
And he will still have one bullet left in the gun, an appeal to the Minnesota State Supreme Court. My understanding is that that process would occupy a similar amount of time, meaning that it is unlikely that a state Supreme Court ruling would be issued prior to late 2008, virtually the end of the senator's term.
The senator's decision puts a host of people in a very difficult position. I have reason to believe that Idaho Republicans at all levels now believe that it would be best for the senator to step down, but have been paralyzed into silence because of their understandable affection for and loyalty to the senator.
It is almost as if he is daring the leadership of his own party at the national level to take initiative to toss him out of the senate, and pretty much banking on the fact that that won't happen. He's made it clear that he will not leave willingly, and may be counting on the likelihood that the will simply isn't there to force him out.
The scandal surrounding the senator will certainly be an issue secular fundamentalists press in the 2008 election cycle, which will make it harder to elect solid pro-family conservatives to Congress and increase the chances that both Congress and the Presidency will wind up in the control of politicians who are hostile to our cherished values.
It will be risky for Senate Republicans to press ethics charges against the senator. They are likely to be painted by their Democratic opponents as homophobic bigots, since the senator was arrested for soliciting anonymous gay sex. It actually is in the best interests of the Democratic Party for the senator to stay in office, because of the embarrassment it causes Republicans and because of the use they will be able to make of the issue in the 2008 election cycle.
We face the odd prospect of Republicans pressuring him to resign, while Democrats become his most ardent defenders.
An ethics investigation would rivet the attention of the public, make the "Tearoom Trade" in public restrooms a matter of national fascination, and be an embarrassment for everyone involved, for the senator, for the state of Idaho, for the Republican Party, and for the entire nation.
We do expect that the senator will continue to vote in a way that is consistent with his history in Congress, and thus he will be a reliable vote for the things we care about. The IVA will continue to encourage him to make pro-family votes, and to urge the pro-family community in Idaho to do the same.
Senator's ability to lead on pro-family issues compromised
However, his ability to be a vocal and visible leader on pro-family issues has been compromised beyond repair. This is unfortunate, since the senate will soon be dealing with two issues that have profound implications for the pro-family movement.
The "hate crimes" issue is likely to surface again soon, as the senate is faced with an override vote on a presidential veto. "Hate crimes" laws — which really are "thought crimes" laws, since they punish perpetrators not for what they did but for what they were thinking when they did it — represent the single greatest danger to religious liberty and free speech in American history.
Once enacted into law, such laws are quickly used to punish anyone who publicly criticizes homosexual behavior, and turns conservative Christians by legal definition into homophobic bigots.
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) will also be dealt with by the senate in the near future. This bill will require Christian employers to hire open homosexuals and cross-dressers or face crippling lawsuits in federal court.
Idaho families need a senator who can unapologetically and fearlessly advocate for religious liberty, free speech, and traditional moral values when these things come before Congress, and unfortunately, the senator has put himself in a place where he cannot provide credible leadership on these matters.
© Bryan Fischer
Judge Charles Porter's ruling against Senator Craig's effort to withdraw his guilty plea was about as much of a legal smackdown as it is possible to deliver. The judge nailed down all four corners of the coffin and left the senator virtually no legal wiggle room of any kind.
It seems likely that he will appeal, but the judge's clearly written, tightly argued and emphatically concluded opinion means that it is almost a certainty that he will lose at the next level as well.
But if he intends to stay in Congress, he may have no choice. Virtually the only way he can justify staying in office is to claim that he is waiting until the legal process has run its course.
If he chooses to appeal, his appeal is unlikely to be heard until well into 2008. The process by which each side prepares its legal briefs alone usually takes a minimum of 100 days, which takes matters into mid-to-late January.
It can take several more months to schedule arguments and for a decision to be reached. Thus the Court of Appeals process will buy the senator time until the spring of 2008.
And he will still have one bullet left in the gun, an appeal to the Minnesota State Supreme Court. My understanding is that that process would occupy a similar amount of time, meaning that it is unlikely that a state Supreme Court ruling would be issued prior to late 2008, virtually the end of the senator's term.
The senator's decision puts a host of people in a very difficult position. I have reason to believe that Idaho Republicans at all levels now believe that it would be best for the senator to step down, but have been paralyzed into silence because of their understandable affection for and loyalty to the senator.
It is almost as if he is daring the leadership of his own party at the national level to take initiative to toss him out of the senate, and pretty much banking on the fact that that won't happen. He's made it clear that he will not leave willingly, and may be counting on the likelihood that the will simply isn't there to force him out.
The scandal surrounding the senator will certainly be an issue secular fundamentalists press in the 2008 election cycle, which will make it harder to elect solid pro-family conservatives to Congress and increase the chances that both Congress and the Presidency will wind up in the control of politicians who are hostile to our cherished values.
It will be risky for Senate Republicans to press ethics charges against the senator. They are likely to be painted by their Democratic opponents as homophobic bigots, since the senator was arrested for soliciting anonymous gay sex. It actually is in the best interests of the Democratic Party for the senator to stay in office, because of the embarrassment it causes Republicans and because of the use they will be able to make of the issue in the 2008 election cycle.
We face the odd prospect of Republicans pressuring him to resign, while Democrats become his most ardent defenders.
An ethics investigation would rivet the attention of the public, make the "Tearoom Trade" in public restrooms a matter of national fascination, and be an embarrassment for everyone involved, for the senator, for the state of Idaho, for the Republican Party, and for the entire nation.
We do expect that the senator will continue to vote in a way that is consistent with his history in Congress, and thus he will be a reliable vote for the things we care about. The IVA will continue to encourage him to make pro-family votes, and to urge the pro-family community in Idaho to do the same.
Senator's ability to lead on pro-family issues compromised
However, his ability to be a vocal and visible leader on pro-family issues has been compromised beyond repair. This is unfortunate, since the senate will soon be dealing with two issues that have profound implications for the pro-family movement.
The "hate crimes" issue is likely to surface again soon, as the senate is faced with an override vote on a presidential veto. "Hate crimes" laws — which really are "thought crimes" laws, since they punish perpetrators not for what they did but for what they were thinking when they did it — represent the single greatest danger to religious liberty and free speech in American history.
Once enacted into law, such laws are quickly used to punish anyone who publicly criticizes homosexual behavior, and turns conservative Christians by legal definition into homophobic bigots.
The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) will also be dealt with by the senate in the near future. This bill will require Christian employers to hire open homosexuals and cross-dressers or face crippling lawsuits in federal court.
Idaho families need a senator who can unapologetically and fearlessly advocate for religious liberty, free speech, and traditional moral values when these things come before Congress, and unfortunately, the senator has put himself in a place where he cannot provide credible leadership on these matters.
© Bryan Fischer
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
