October 21, 2005
Home Staff Archives

Terri Schiavo would have been a great pick for the high court
Evan Green
The Advocate

What were they doing? I thought last spring when they pulled the feeding tube on Terri Schiavo. Why are they ending this woman’s life?

Some said she was useless, that she could never function as a human in society. But I say they acted far too soon when they ended her life.

As it turns out, there were a lot of things she could have done.

We all know she would have made a better White House adviser than Karl Rove or Scooter Libby. She wouldn’t have leaked Valerie Plame’s name to the press. She was really good at keeping secrets.

She could have matched Federal Emergency Management Agency director Michael Brown’s performance during the Katrina disaster.

But, where she would have excelled the most would have been in the Supreme Court.
She was a perfect shoe-in for the position. Her qualifications were beyond reproach.

1) She didn’t have an opinion on anything. Nothing could taint or sway her judgments. In the Senate hearings no one would be able to trick her into giving a preconceived testimony on a topic that could possibly come before the court.

2) She was well versed in a cryptic language similar to that of the courts, a shrouded jargon beyond the understanding of the common people.

3) She kept a dignified and aloof air, well-becoming of a justice. Someone who could sit for hours without squirming.

4) She had absolutely no law experience. Usually this would be seen as a drawback for a nominee, but not anymore. According to Bush’s inspired logic, less legal experience is better. That’s why he nominated Harriet Miers, a woman who has never served in a judicial capacity. Ever.

5) She was a woman, and everyone was expecting another woman on the court. But better than that she was a woman who let her husband run the show.

Even though she is no longer with us Schiavo still left her mark on those still living and eligible for the Supreme Court.

Judge Roberts was heavily influenced by some of Schiavo’s trademark body language. He maintained a glassy, awed expression throughout his Senate hearings, as well as a stately upturned chin.

And you can’t understate the importance his puzzled looks played in confounding senators to silence.

He also kept the traditional Schiavo optimism going. He reminded us that he was able to snap out of his persistent, vegetative views and became a more active thinking judge.

We may never know the full extent of Schiavo’s influence on the court, but one thing is certain: we’ll be seeing more justices like her as time goes on.

It’s just a shame she was never given the chance to serve.

 
Volume 41, Issue 5