CalPundit points to a WaTi story reporting that Congress may opt to restrict the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to prevent them from hearing the Pledge of Allegiance case. Cowed Democrats, again demonstrating that whatever civil libertarian principles they may harbor are nothing next to their terror of appearing unpatriotic, have gone along with nary a whimper.

A couple of things are revealed here. The first is that the people pushing this obviously must believe that the court will, correctly, strike down the addition of the words “under God” to the pledge as a violation of the Establishment Clause. Since the 9th Circuit’s ruling only covers a cluster of western states, and blocking an appeal would (as I understand it) result in that ruling being left in place, the only reason to prevent an appeal would be the expectation that the Court would uphold the 9th Circuit’s decision, applying it to the nation as a whole.

The second is that (in case you hadn’t noticed) the much trumpeted conservative constitutionalism is sheer bollocks. Arguably, given the precedent of Ex Parte McCardle, they can do this under their Article III, Section 2 power to make “Exceptions” to the Court’s appellate jurisdiction. But the practical effect of starting down this road would obviously be to undermine a meaningful judicial check on majority sentiments. The whole point of life tenure for justices is precisely that the dictates of the Constitution aren’t supposed to be overridden by the passions of temporary majorities. If this sort of move is allowed to fly, any time the Constitution conflicts with what is popular or politically expedient, the Constitution can simply be taken out of the picture.

The whole affair is unspeakably disgusting. The legislators who are so clearly willing—eager, even—to urinate on the Constitution for a bit of cheap, self-promotional flag-waving should be ashamed. The only silver lining is that blocking a ruling would probably prevent a vote to amend the Constitution to the same effect, making an exception to the First Amendment for the sake of an empty ritual. Sadly, that would probably pass. So I suppose I’m in the depressing position of being glad our craven and opportunistic Congress wants to eviscerate judicial oversight, because if they don’t they’ll decide to start rewriting the Bill of Rights. Oy.