Public 'Interest' Shouldn't Mean Money

By Mark Steyn - July 3rd, 2005 - Chicago Sun Times

Do you know Nancy Pelosi? Her job is leading the Democratic Party in the House of Representatives. They should have asked for references. Here's her reaction to the Supreme Court's recent decision on "eminent domain": "It is a decision of the Supreme Court," said the minority leader. "So this is almost as if God has spoken."

That's not the way Abraham Lincoln saw it: "If the policy of the government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court . . . the people will have ceased to be their own rulers."

I am not sure why the Chicago Sun Times has suddenly become an activist publication for limitations on our courts. Maybe it has something to do with the court abandoning the protection for reporters having unfettered ability to use anonymous sources. The courts had even been permitting reporters to create anonymous sources to say things that damaged those who were not politically aligned with the reporter without fear of reprisal. Can't allow reporters to have limitations on their actions, now can we? That has now ended with the Supreme Court not interferring with sending a couple of reporters to jail. Newspapers were stunned, and maybe the new posture of the Sun Times is their way of retaliating.

Whatever the reason, for the second day in a row, the best article condemning the court's recent decisions has appeard in the Sun Times. In this article Steyn takes apart both the Ten Commandments ruling and the eminent domain ruling. It is an excellent article.