Keyes Warns that Bush Could Appoint Sandra Day O'Connor as Chief Justice

Letter from Alan Keyes | 05-08-04 | Keyes, Alan

[Theodore R.]

Former UN diplomat and Republican presidential contender Alan Keyes of Maryland is warning that "pressure from Democrats and RINOs is building on President Bush to nominate Sandra Day O'Connor as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and hand liberal special interests everything they want -- on a platter!

In a letter to "Defenders of Justice," Keyes writes:

"You've seen Ted Kennedy's filibusters against conservatives federal judges set the stage for a national disaster.

"Because every contact I have tells me that President Bush's political "advisors" are pressing him to make "safe" Supreme Court appointments. That is, appointments the liberals will approve.

"The fact is, my friend, that Senate liberals -- catering to N.O.W., Planned Parenthood, and other pro-abortion groups -- have determined to filibuster ever conservative nominated to the federal bench!

"And the Bush administration's response is -- just cave in!!!!

"Not only that, but after her votes that ENDORSED racial preferences at the University of Michigan Law School and OPENED THE DOOR to legal homosexual 'marriage,' Justice O'Connor is a darling to the liberals!

"And then to take her place as an associate justice, the Bush folks want the president to name Alberto Gonzales, the White House counsel. But Gonzales, you see, is the same man who guided the feeble, halfhearted opposition to Michigan's racial quotas -- the kind of wimpy approach that lost the case!

"Friends like Mr. Gonzales we conservatives just don't need.

"And you also know that for years liberal-activist judges have created laws from the bench -- laws that Congress and the legislatures would never approve. The most infamous, and tragic, of course was Roe v. Wade, which has led to the slaughter of over 40 million Americans.

"Jihadist terrorists could never have produced the devastation that has been caused by Roe v. Wade.

. . .

"What you may not know is that Senate Republicans, many of them RINOs, have no stomach to fight for conservative judges. They don't want to go one step out of their way to get such judges approved.

"In fact, 'success' to Senate RINOs would be a string of pro-abortion liberals moving sweetly through the confirmation process without the least bit of friction!

"Because Chief Justice Rehnquist may possibly retire this summer, despite the election. And his replacement is crucial! For the next Chief Justice will either perpetuate for another generation the cruel consequences of Roe v. Wade or will render decisions which allow legislatures to defang the death-dealing serpent of abortion AND defend traditional marriage!

"My friend, we cannot allow the Supreme Court to be led by a friend of abortion! BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT CONFRONTS US if Sandra Day O'Connor becomes Chief Justice! And Mr. Gonzales is likewise an enemy of the pro-life cause!

"In fact, when they were both on the Texas Supreme Court, then Judge Gonzales castigated fellow Judge Priscilla Owen. (Yes, the same judge whose nomination to the federal appeals court bench was filibustered.) Judge Owen, you see, believes that parents and religious beliefs SHOULD play a role in a minor daughter's decision to have an abortion.

"But Judge Gonzales called such thinking 'an unconscionable act of judicial activism.'

"So giving deference to parents' religous beliefs is 'judicial activism,' but striking down state laws against sodomy, for example, is not!

"The truth is, my friend, judges like Sandra Day O'Connor and Alberto Gonzales cater only to the 'elite opinion,' not to the view of the majority of Americans.

". . . It's vital their nominations be stopped before they're even made -- because Senate liberals will jump at the chance to confirm them.

"In fact, this situation reminds me of what happened with the FIRST President Bush. Stymied by Senate liberals in his Supreme Court nominations, he nominated a 'moderate' judge -- David Souter. Now Souter is a diehard member of the 'liberal bloc' on the Supreme Court."

Keyes asks for signatures opposing the O'Connor-Gonzales nominations before they are made. Address him at The Declaration Alliance, National Processing Center, P.O. Box 131728, Houston, TX 77219-1728.

[trek]

This sounds bogus. The inscrutable Sandy-poo is more likely to retire than ascend to the post of Chief Justice.

[Keith]

Keyes is smoking dope. O'Connor is looking to RETIRE. Anyone Bush will nominate has to be under 65...he wants someone who will be there long after he has finished his second term. If Scalia won't fly, he will name a new person entirely.

At worst, you will get Kennedy...

It could be worse...you could have had President Gore and get Chief Justice Ginsburg...

[Republican Wildcat]

O'Connor is already on the Court, so nominating her as Chief Justice would make no difference in the votes on cases.

This seems to be more hysterical than anything else.

[Drango]

Keys is is danger of becoming as irrelevant as Pat Buchanan. What? He already is? My bad.

[Congressman Billybob]

The premise of this article is false. No President would ever appoint a 70-year-old in shaky health, to be Chief Justice. The Flame isn't worth the candle; she wouldn't last more than a few years.

This has nothing to do with ideology; though the past experience with Bush judicial appointments demonstrate that he will do far better than O'Connor. The point is that even if her ideology were perfect (which it isn't), it is foolish to suggest that her name is in play when Rehnquist resigns.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, "Honesty Problems with Kerry and Gorelick: Pin the Truth on the Democrat."

[nmh]

She is a lefty. Ms. pro abortion and female job quota queen would be disastrous for the conservative folks.

[johnb838]

I would think that what happens to the composition of the senate in the fall would be pivotal to whether W can mount an assault on Roe v. Wade. Not to mention the presidential election.

We need a filibuster proof majority. I don't know if it's possible this time but I hope we can at least increase our majority.

[deport]

Keyes doing a little fund raising?

[TomGuy]

I thought she was one of those who is seriously considering retirement. It wouldn't make much sense to appoint her as Chief Justice, except ceremonially to be the first female CJ.

Even so, her service would be relatively short, due to her age.

[Theodore R.]

No President would ever appoint a 70-year-old in shaky health,

Keyes seems to think that O'Connor is the preference of the Senate Republican liberals. He probably would expect her to serve just a couple of year, and then he would get another shot at an appointment in 2009. Yet, I believe that she would stay on the court so long as she is the one-vote difference.

[TomGuy]

But, then, yesterday, Teddy Kennedy was ranting for Bush to fire Rumsfeld as SecDef and appoint Colin Powell as SecDef.

lol.

[MJY1288]

Does the Senate have to confirm a sitting SCOTUS Justice to be named the Chief Justice?

[MJY1288]

Keyes would be a good SCOTUS Justice

[stands2reason]

Keyes running again? Mmmmmm?

Isn't SD-O on the list to retire soon?

Where does he get this stuff? By reading chicken's intestines or something? Yeeesh....

[Keith]

There is ZERO chance of any "assault" on Roe v. Wade. This is only a possibility voiced by the two extremes on the issue, as they demogogue the issue in order to raise money.

Any reversal of Roe must be UNANIMOUS. That will not happen for AT LEAST 20 years...and probably closer to 50. There would have to be no one on the court nominated by a Democrat, since that is their litmus issue.

So let's not waste our time with that.

Conservatives must satisfy themselves with whittling away at it...and giving more freedom to the states to regulate and restrict it when dealing with minors...

And most importantly, both sides would be wise to put more energy into liberalizing adoption procedures and laws.

[swilhelm73]

Presuming this is correct, the chief justice has no more real power then any other justice;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Justice_of_the_United_States

If so, appointing a real conservative as an associate justice while elevating Sandy could be a smart move politically...

[Keith]

yes...whether on the court or not, a new CJ must go through the same vetting and confirmation process...

[Keith]

Don't kid yourself...while there is no constitutional power, the CJ is very influential, especially in choosing which cases to take.