Borking Up the Wrong Tree

"THE SUPREME Court just follows the illiction returns."

So opined Mr. Dooley--the fictional Irish politician created by turn of the century New York columnist Peter Finley Dunne--in an essay satirizing the High Court's use of complicated judicial philosophies to reach decisions in accord with the politicians who appointed them. To Dooley these philosophies were just rationalizations.

The nomination of conservative Judge Robert H. Bork has once again proven Dooley's insight. But in the case of Bork, whose judicial demeanor the Senate Judiciary Committee has spent the past two weeks examining, it's not yet clear which election return will play the deciding role. Will it be the election returns of 1984 that put Ronald Reagan and his conservative social ideals back into the White House? Or will it be the election of 1986 that gave the Democrats control of the Senate and control of the Judiciary Committee, which has dissected Bork in all but body?

Whatever the answer, the result will be the same--politics will determine the future of Judge Bork and the conservative social views he represents. And that's something neither side in this latest Battle on Capitol Hill seems willing to admit.

INSTEAD THEY have managed to do just about everything they can to avoid talking politics. The senators, and various legal scholars and academics who come before the committee, discuss the nature of Bork's "judicial philosophy," how he's out of the mainstream or not out of the mainstream and what it he will be like if he's on the court.

What sometimes gets lost in the midst of all this legal jargon is that Bork is on the wrong side of the single most important social issue dividing people in this country today--the right to reproductive freedom. Bork has said that he opposes abortion and that he considers the famed Roe v. Wade decision ill-reasoned. These statements are very important because the court is at its most powerful when setting the social policy of the country.

That's enough reason to stop Bork's nomination to the court. Democrats should not be shy in using the votes that they control to do so. Ironically the only person who has come out to say that he will oppose Bork, simply because of the judge's stance on this issue, is a Republican--Sen. Robert Packwood of Oregon.

Reagan nominated Bork because the judge meshes with the conservative social views that the president holds and has presented to the electorate. Insight Magazine, published by The Washington Times, the right-wing newspaper, clearly captured Reagan's motives in their head-line on a cover story that came out when Bork first was nominated. It read, "Bork: Reagan Decides to Do Battle."

The Democrats, because of the 1986 election returns that gave them a Senate majority, now have the clout to block Bork. They should do so. And remember--it's just politics.