The more that comes out about new Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, the worse and worse he looks. The Washington Post reports that during a Senate primary debate in 2014, he was asked what criteria he would use to reject Obama’s judicial nominees. He said that all judges must have a “Biblical view of justice.”
But Whitaker went the farthest: “Natural law often times is used from the eye of the beholder and what I would like to see — I’d like to see things like their world view, what informs them. Are they people of faith? Do they have a biblical view of justice? — which I think is very important because we all know that our government …”“Levitical or New Testament?” interrupted Erickson.
“I’m a New Testament,” continued Whitaker. “And what I know is as long as they have that world view, that they’ll be a good judge. And if they have a secular world view, where this is all we have here on Earth, then I’m going to be very concerned about that judge.”
Of course, the phrase “Biblical view of justice” is mostly tripe. It can mean virtually anything. One could easily argue, for instance, that Trump is violating the Biblical view of justice by his anti-immigrant views. But that is obviously not what Whitaker means by it or he would have criticized those views at some point during his prolific career as a radio and TV pundit. He means the full Christian right version of “Biblical justice,” which is about as unjust as one can imagine. Frankly, that statement alone should morally disqualify him from the position.