Gonzales Wrong for Attorney General; Why Won't Bush pick a Pro-Life Nominee? American Life League.

usnewswire.com/ ^

[cpforlife.org]

To: National Desk

Contact: Amber Matchen of the American Life League, 540-903-9572 or amatchen@all.org

WASHINGTON, Nov. 11 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Judie Brown, president of American Life League, issued the following statement in response to news that White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales is being considered as the replacement for U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft:

"President Bush appears to be doing all that he can to downright ignore pro-life principles. There can be no other explanation for his recommendation of Alberto Gonzales as attorney general. Gonzales has a record, and that record is crystal clear.

"As a Texas Supreme Court justice, Gonzales' rulings implied he does not view abortion as a heinous crime. Choosing not to rule against abortion, in any situation, is the epitome of denying justice for an entire segment of the American population -- preborn babies in the womb.

"When asked if his own personal feelings about abortion would play a role in his decisions, Gonzales told the Los Angeles Times in 2001 that his 'own personal feelings about abortion don't matter... The question is, what is the law, what is the precedent, what is binding in rendering your decision. Sometimes, interpreting a statute, you may have to uphold a statute that you may find personally offensive. But as a judge, that's your job.' Gonzales' position is clear: the personhood of the preborn human being is secondary to technical points of law, and that is a deadly perspective for anyone to take.

"President Bush claims he wants to assist in bringing about a culture of life. Such a culture begins with total protection for every innocent human being from the moment that person's life begins. Within the short period of one week, the president has been silent on pro-abortion Sen. Arlen Specter's desire to chair the senate judiciary committee, and has spoken out in favor of a judge with a pro-abortion track record to lead the Justice Department.

"Why is President Bush betraying the babies? Justice begins with protecting the most vulnerable in our midst. Please, Mr. President -- just say no to the unjust views of Alberto Gonzales."

http://www.usnewswire.com/

-0-

[stuartcr]

What is the difference between a judge ruling against something that is in the constitution, and legislating from the bench?

[Ol' Sparky]

I dislike him because he and his fellow judges overturned TWO lower court rulings in regard to a judicial bypass provision that prevented a 17 year old from getting an abortion. Thanks to Gonzalez, the judicial bypass provision was reduced to to the lowest possible level, thus making it easier for minors to get an abortion without parental consent.

It was soley left up to the courts to determine the standard for a judicial bypass and Gonzalez and friends went out of their way to set a low standard to obtain one.

This blind faith in Bush's nominees is going to result in more O'Connors, Souters and Kennedys making their way into the court system and SCOTUS.

Gonzalez is totally unacceptable as a future Supreme Court nominee.

[sinkspur]

But Bush is making moves that will not help the Culture of Life, and that's why I'm trying to draw attention to his backpedaling.

How is he hurting the culture of life? Gonzales is pro-life, and he has no jurisdiction over the Senate.

Judie Brown is such an ogre, it's no wonder the more mainstream Right-to-Life groups will have nothing to do with her.

[Hermann the Cherusker]

Gonzales is pro-life. He voted to uphold a law passed by the legislature of Texas, rather than making a judicial meddling of it.

In other words, he is not an activist jurist.

[Netizen]

Barely a week has passed since 84 percent of the nation's self-described conservatives cast their ballots for George W. Bush, and already the president and his administration have delivered at least two good, strong, swift kicks in the teeth to the voters who elected him. Speaking in Mexico this week Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledged that the administration will revive its amnesty plan for illegal aliens, and in Washington Hispanic White House counsel Alberto Gonzales was named as the next attorney general.

If you think that is bad, add this:

Robert Novak (back to story)

January 23, 2003

Bush's first Justice?

WASHINGTON -- White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales succeeded in weakening the government's intervention in the University of Michigan racial preference dispute, but at a potentially heavy personal cost. He increased the difficulty for his friend and patron, George W. Bush, to make him a Supreme Court justice.

The petition in the Michigan case, as it arrived at the White House from Solicitor General Theodore Olson, finally would have placed a president unequivocally against forcing racial diversity on university admissions. Gonzales, who has publicly supported racial preferences, revised the petition. Accepted by the president, it advocates the desirability of government-sponsored diversity if achieved short of quotas.

What do you get when you take amnesty and add affirmative action to it?

[Dante3]

Well stated.

The AG does not make laws. Single issue "conservatives" are usually not conservatives -- they can go liberal, depending on just one issue. I know of extreme liberals who are also pro-life.

[afraidfortherepublic]

I'm as pro-life as anyone, but what does this have to do with the duties of AG?

The AG's job is to enforce the laws that are on the books. The AG does not make the laws and he does not interpret the laws. He launches investigations and hauls people into court according to the laws already on the books.

Save your concern for judges and elected officials. You're wasing your time getting into a tizzy about the AG.

[Southack]

"It's true Judie Brown is unappeasable. But Bush is making moves that will not help the Culture of Life, and that's why I'm trying to draw attention to his backpedaling."

President Bush isn't backpedaling. He wants the *law* upheld.

What radicals on the left and right want are activist judges; that's not upholding the law, that's rewriting it with and by unelected judges.

President Bush wants the *law* upheld. He also wants to ban abortion (e.g. his ban on Partial Birth Abortions). This means two very different things have to happen: the laws have to change, and the judges have to uphold the law rather than re-writing it.

Putting Gonzales into a prosecutor's chair aids in upholding the law, so that's not "backpedaling" by GWB. QED.

[LadyPilgrim]

The Bush haters are back, just looking for ANY issue to trash him with. If they had their way, we'd snatch "defeat" from the jaws of victory!!!

Yep, I knew it was too good to be true. On another thread they are griping about the color red! It sounds like a schoolyard!

[stuartcr]

I doubt we will see much balance in our lifetime.

[Howlin]

Dare I even ask what the problem with "red" is?

[churchillbuff]

The AG will have very little to do with abortion but EVERYTHING to do with whether or not we're kept safe."""

Not true. The AG represents the government in court, decides which cases (abortion related, for instance) the government will weigh in on. The AG helps decide who gets nominated for federal judgeships. The AG decides whether to go after pro-lifers for "RICO" violations. The AG also has a host of civil rights responsibilities, and if (like Gonzales) the AG believes in racial preferences, that means the department could follow in the footsteps of Clinton's.

[rhinohunter]

See 27

YES!!! My point exactly!!! It was of paramount importance that Gonzales NOT be appointed to SCOTUS. And now he won't be!!! We should be rejoicing, not attacking our President!!!

And it's unrealistic to think that Bush would cut short Gonzales' term at USAG only to appoint another USAG who would also have an abbreviated term. Bush would not play such games with an office so important to our national security.

[churchillbuff]

Gonzales is appropriate for the AG position and NOT the SCOTUS."""

When Bush nominates him for Supreme Court, I predict that the Bushbots like you will suddenly find Gonzales appropriate for that job, too.

[churchillbuff]

It was of paramount importance that Gonzales NOT be appointed to SCOTUS. And now he won't be!!!"""

What makes you say that? Being attorney general doesn't disqualify you from being nominated for the Supreme Court. Quite the opposite, it's a prestigious stepping stone.

[churchillbuff]

looking for ANY issue to trash him """

As if the integrity of the judicial system and a conservative agenda for the courts is a small, insignificant issue.

[LadyPilgrim]

It's supposed to be the communist color.

I guess I never realised that colors were forbidden.
We didn't have this in my "young" time. ;-/
And I remember communism very well!

[churchillbuff]

Single issue "conservatives" are usually not conservatives"""

Neither are people who stand ready to applaud, robot-like, whatever Bush does.

[Shryke]

of COURSE. a judge ruling against ANY unconstitutional ruling is acting correctly

I disagree. Please show me where that is spelled out in the Constitution, etc.?

[Arizona Carolyn]

I agree... his position on abortion has no standing as Attorney General. His job is to oversee the Department of Justice and FBI and make certain they do their jobs properly.