Time for a Litmus Test — or Three

Sandra Day O'Connor has resigned as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. And as we gear up for the confirmation hearing for her successor, let's stiffen spines and confront the absolute necessity for a litmus test or three.

The first, of course, is Roe v. Wade. That's been the subtext of every confirmation hearing in recent memory. Time to make it text, period.

Then there is the slipperier but equally crucial test of the nominee's stance on the wall between church and state.

The third? Prisoner rights, for want of a better term, especially if Alberto Gonzales is the nominee.

What is curious is that conservatives the Radical Right, too, are is asking for a litmus test — does Roe v. Wade turn the nominee's paper blue or pink. Except, of course, the Radical Right wants a different answer from the one we must demand. The pundits are saying this morning that the Radical Right is unhappy with Gonzales because he supported abortion rights during his term on the Texas bench. In other words, Alberto "Torture Memo" Gonzales is seen, in Radical Right circles, as unacceptably "moderate."

Robert Bork called in to CNN and delivered himself of a rather uncomplimentary assessment of O'Connor. (He may be smart, but he sure is no gentleman.) He also still sounds bitter at worst, testy at best, in recollecting his own defeat. We dodged a bullet on that one. Let's make damned sure we dodge another one this time around, even if dodging a bullet means unleashing a nuclear device.

Contact the members of the Judiciary Committee.