Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Harriet Myers and Abortion: a Few Clues
Various | Oct. 3, 2005 | Self

Posted on 10/03/2005 8:00:28 AM PDT by pkajj

There's not a lot out there in the major news services, but three clues do exist:

1. In a Feb. 2, 2002 AP Article, Harriet Myers, as an ABA panelist, was asked if a potential Supreme Court justice should be asked how he or she would vote in abortion-related cases. She responded "Nominees are clearly prohibited from making such a commitment and presidents are prohibited from asking for it.."

2. In an August 12, 1992 article from the Wall Street Journal, it was reported that the ABA policy-making body had taken a pro-abortion rights position (by a 276 - 168 vote). Harriet Miers argued against the pro-abortion endorsement, and instead supported a resolution that would require the full memebership of the ABA to be polled before the ABA could go on record supporting either side of the issue.

3. In a July 24, 2002 article from the Austin American Statesman, Harriet Myers was a reported to be a prominent supporter of Priscilla Owen (pro-life), and was in attendance at the contentious hearings where Democrats subjected Owen to their predictable grilling.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last
To: Republican Red

The most encouraging thing I've seen today was information that Miers was basically in charge of the process that gave us judges like Luttig and Brown in the appellate courts.


21 posted on 10/03/2005 8:25:56 AM PDT by kevkrom ("Political looters" should be shot on sight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: pkajj
I have a question for the people who are already up in arms over this pick.

Are you really disappointed because Bush didn't nominate someone who you KNOW will get the Dems to set off a filibuster?

It seems like some Republicans have been itching for a reprisal of that showdown ever since a vacancy opened up on the Court.

Personally, I'll trust Bush on his picks. I was pretty happy with Roberts, so I have no reason to be unhappy with Meirs hat this time.

I haven't heard much about her other than conflicting information on her stance regarding abortion, and that isn't a really big issue for me anyways.
22 posted on 10/03/2005 8:58:50 AM PDT by StandardDeviation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Ms. Miers has had a hand at picking most of Bush's nominations in the judiciary. She was responsible for Janice Rodgers Brown, Miguel Estrada, Pricilla Owen and John Roberts being on the bench.

If she was so pro-choice, wouldn't she have pushed through at least one pro-choice candidate? Wouldn't she have sabotaged any pro-life candidate instead of getting them on the bench?
23 posted on 10/03/2005 9:01:57 AM PDT by Republican Red (''Van der Sloot" is Dutch for ''Kennedy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Republican Red

A very good point. I'm going to trust Bush. We don't have much choice anyway at this point. If you didn't trust Bush, the only thing you could have done about it was to vote against him.


24 posted on 10/03/2005 9:37:36 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson