Posted on 02/16/2016 6:45:23 PM PST by JediJones
Ted Cruz echoes what Randy Barnett and I explored in our Weekly Standard piece–that both President Bushes made their Supreme Court appointments based on what would be easier, and which candidates had shorter paper trails.
Bush 41 chose David Souter over Edith Jones because it would have been easier. Bush 43 chose Roberts over (Cruz's boss) Michael Luttig because he had a short paper trail.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz distanced himself from his past support for Chief Justice John Roberts on Saturday, offering up an alternative history where Roberts...was never appointed to the court.
"I want to focus on two moments in time that made a world of difference," the Texas senator told a gathering of conservatives at Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Council convention in St. Louis on Saturday.
Cruz first focused on George H.W. Bush's nomination of David Souter over Edith Jones to the Supreme Court before quickly turning his attention to Chief Justice John Roberts.
"Let's fast forward to 2005," stated Cruz. "In 2005, in one room was John Roberts and in another room was my former boss Mike Luttig, the rock conservative on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, and George W. Bush picked John Roberts."
"Now in both instances, it wasn't that they were looking for someone who wasn't a conservative, it's that it was easier. Neither Souter nor Roberts had said much of anything. They didn't have a paper trail, they wouldn't have a fight. Whereas if you actually nominate a conservative, then you gotta spend some political capital. Then you gotta fight."
Cruz stated if Jones and Luttig had been on the court instead of Souter and Roberts, then the marriage laws in every state would still be on the books and Obamacare would not been law.
(Excerpt) Read more at joshblackman.com ...
Cruz' important point here is that the Bushes picked justices who had no paper trail so that Democrats couldn't pick things out of their history and "Bork" them. Republicans took the easy way out instead of fighting for a proven conservative nominee. They put political expediency over promotion of conservative policy. And what makes Cruz different is that he will FIGHT for conservative values because that's the only reason he's in this job to begin with.
Cruz heartily endorsed Roberts. Check the National Review article he wrote when Roberts was nominated.
Cruz is my choice as a principled conservative.
All the Cruzers asking for a list of lies Cruz tells can add this to the list. What a detestable man Cruz is.
“Ted Cruz endorsed Mike Luttig and Edith Jones for the Supreme Court.”
Ted Cruz was in high school when Souter was appointed.
So Cruz in not allowed to comment on Souter as any experienced and knowledgeable legal professional? Wow.
This was in 2005, when Roberts was appointed.
He has NOTHING on you - and all your ilk.
They’re still alive and Jones is still an active judge. He’s mentioning these as the types of justices he would appoint.
OK, I’ll bite. Where oh where is the lie of which you complain?
No, it was stated that Cruz endorsed Jones over Souter. That would have been back when Cruz was in college, not high school. My mistake.
What a complete hypocrite.
In the words of Ted Cruz:
As an individual, John Roberts is undoubtedly a principled conservative, as is the president who appointed him. He clerked for Chief Justice Rehnquist, worked in the Reagan White House, and served as the principal deputy solicitor general in President George H.W. Bush’s Justice Department.
But, as a jurist, Judge Roberts’s approach will be that of his entire career: carefully, faithfully applying the Constitution and legal precedent.
He is a mainstream judge, respected across the ideological spectrum. Thus, he’s earned praise from liberal icons such as Harvard Law Professor Larry Tribe, and Chicago Law Professor Cass Sunstein, as well as from Clinton Solicitors General Walter Dellinger and Seth Waxman, and Carter and Clinton Counsel Lloyd Cutler, the latter two of whom both described Roberts as a man of “unquestioned integrity and fair-mindedness.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/214989/right-stuff-ted-cruz
Those in opposing campaigns try to twist history into meaning Cruz pushed for Robers. They fact that he preferred Luttig did not mean he would not support Roberts once Bush nominated him. There was no evidence that he would do what he has done. Lesson: no paper trail can bite both ways. Spend the capital. Fight!!!!!
The left has been deplorable in their tactics, what with Bork and Thomas. The right needs to fight without stooping to that level, but doing everything in their power to get conservatives on the court.
What a pantload. “Bush’s fault!” Grow up, Rafael.
Clearly the lesson learned is to go for the fighter, like Scalia, Thomas and Alito.
Typical LAZY BASTARD BUSH “Way”! Take the path of LEAST Resistance.
Exactly.
Cruz stated if Jones and Luttig had been on the court instead of Souter and Roberts,
then the marriage laws in every state would still be on the books
and Obamacare would not have been law.
“Where oh where is the lie of which you complain?”
You don’t get it (or you probably really do get it). It is the seriousness of the charges that matter (not the accuracy).
Isn’t it ironic that Rubio and Trump are both spreading the meme that Cruz lies? Both Rubio and Trump have been caught lying recently but still make this accusation against Cruz.
Rubio was caught red handed with his alternate Spanish version of his amnesty policy.
Trump, has been claiming Tom Coburn called Cruz a liar. Coburn said that this is a lie.
Of course these are just a couple of examples. But maybe Trump is not exactly lying. I think Trump has been living so long in his billionaire echo chamber that he actually believes whatever comes out of his mouth at the moment to be reality. I really want to believe he can govern conservatively, but everything he says lately is persuading me otherwise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.