Posted on 12/07/2004 5:46:03 AM PST by alessandrofiaschi
Reid Says He Could Back Scalia for Chief Justice Comments Anger Liberals And Thomas Supporters
By Michael A. Fletcher Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, December 7, 2004; Page A04
Partisans on both sides of the debate over judicial nominees voiced displeasure yesterday with incoming Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid's comments indicating that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia could make an acceptable nominee for chief justice.
In an interview Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press," the Nevada Democrat said that although he often disagrees with Scalia, he could support him to be chief justice of the United States because he is "one smart guy." Reid qualified his statement, however, saying Scalia first would have to overcome "ethics problems," including his refusal to recuse himself from a case involving the Office of the Vice President after accompanying Vice President Cheney on a duck-hunting trip to Louisiana in January.
Reid's comments startled lobbying groups preparing for the battles sure to come with the likely turnover in the Supreme Court in the near future. Eight of the nine justices are age 65 or older. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, 80, is fighting thyroid cancer and has missed the court's public sessions in recent weeks, generating speculation about who would replace him should he step down.
Members of several liberal activist groups called Reid's office yesterday to seek an explanation of the Democratic leader's comments and to say they would oppose the elevation of Scalia, one of the court's most conservative justices. "We would strongly oppose the nomination of Justice Scalia to chief justice," said Ralph G. Neas, president of People for the American Way. Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice, added that "ethics issues alone" should keep Scalia from becoming chief justice.
(...)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Love Scalia...have no issues with it...the draw for me for Thomas comes from my inherent Irish nature to tweat and thumb my nose....either man would be a gift......
Read closely. While saying he "could" support Scalia, it was only an attempt to look reasonable. He left himself and escape hatch - ethics. He won't support Scalia.
But funny that he's paying a political price among liberals for his inane comment.
Name: Antonin Scalia
Birth Date: March 11, 1936
Place of Birth: Trenton, New Jersey, United States
Nationality: American
Gender: Male
Occupations: supreme court justice
Name: Clarence Thomas
Birth Date: June 23, 1948
Place of Birth: Pin Point, Georgia, United States
Nationality: American
Ethnicity: African American
Gender: Male
Occupations: politician, supreme court justice
Scalia will turn 69 next spring while Thomas will be 57. Wonder why Reid wants Scalia instead? If Thomas were elevated to Chief Justice, he would probably serve a quarter century as Chief Justice.
Notice the libs don't mind that he slurred a prominent black man, but that he praised a prominent conservative.
One can read the arguments written by Thomas and Scalia and maybe come to a different conclusion but I am doubtful that I would. And I certainly don't think that the selection of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court should be based just on an analysis of their voting record in court cases. It has to be more than that.
Thomas has the right philosophy. He deserves to be sitting on the Supreme Court. He is, I believe, a "strict constructionist". But he does not have the breadth and depth of Scalia. He should not be embarrased by that fact. Nobody else does either.
I think Reid is basically right about Thomas and Scalia. Scalia is the guy I want.
Huh? You lost me there...
Hi Paleo,
Which Thomas opinions do you think are not well written?
Also "we actually don't know much about his personal faith"? Remember that we're the side that thinks there should NOT be a religious test (or anti-religious test) for high office.
Thomas is a convert to Catholicism, but as Scalia is very fond of saying, if a justice does his job according to the contitution his personal opinions should be irrelevant. Remember, it's the OTHER side that says someone who is pro-life should eb excluded from the court.
Reid is another Daschle: a phony moderate that actually is a liberal.
Simply stated, Thomas is mysterious and (as I've already written) he isn't a brilliant member of the Court.
State it more simply by giving us the name of one of his poorly-written opinions.
Good point....at least he will get slapped from both sides his way and he will have to choke and his words and back pedal like a maniac
For some who might not be sure of what happened
with Thomas, it might be worthwhile to go back
and reread a bit. At the Thomas/Hill hearing,
pay attention to who was sitting in judgement of
the man. I wouldn't want that panel sitting in
judgment of Jesus Christ! I always felt Thomas
said just the right things in his defense. Au
contraire to Mr. Reid, Thomas is NOT an illiterate!
http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~ybf2u/Thomas-Hill/1011a01.html
You're kidding me right? Those organizations are very much against him. I think Scalia is the most brilliant justice on the Supreme Court, but he is getting a bit old to be elevated to Chief Justice. I would rather have someone who is young enough to be able to choose the timing of his retirement. If President Bush is suceeded by a DemocRAT who serves eight years, Scalia would have to stay on till at least 2017 when he would be 81 to be able to let a Republican president choose the next Chief Justice. It is also possible President Bush could nominate someone who is not even currently on the Supreme Court to be the next Chief Justice.
Not kidding. When Thurgood Marshall resigned, some organizations (not only liberal) pressed Senators to appoint another black, and Thomas resulted strong even if there were trepidations during the vote.
Which Thomas opinions do you think are not well written?
You should have addressed your response to alessandrofiaschi.
If only we could get the election of senators back into their respective state houses like it was before 1914! That way, even if they were worthless, they would go home when the people of the state decided to can their state legislators.
Check out Mormon Church D&C writings by Church Prophets prior to 1978.
Reid's own words reflect those teachings.
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.