Posted on 06/21/2005 4:48:41 PM PDT by Tree of Liberty
Hugh Hewitt just said, moments ago, that, according to his sources, Chief Justice William Renquist will announce his retirement on Monday, and that the President will announce his nominee on Tuesday.
You missed your calling. If you were an activist Federal judge, you could substitute your opinion for the plain language of the Constitution.
You saw the debate this morning?
O'Reilly said the debate was pretty heated and that Ms. Burlingame was already upset from the debate, when the guy walked over and slapped her on the back...
Brian said that they were arguing in the "green room" before the debate, and they both asked to be interviewed separately, but the show didn't have enough time for two interviews....
I just hope that Brian doesn't get in any trouble from the higher ups at Fox....or a lawsuit for some reason.
Its possible he's going to stay there until hauled out in a coffin. If Hillary appoints his replacement....well it won't affect him.
PS. Judge Edith Jones is also 'only' 56 years old.
1) As youngest member of SCOTUS, we'd get 20 years of a Thomas court, vs. 8 years of a Scalia court. Isn't the whole point of getting nominees on the court to prolong your beliefs for many years to come?
2) Thomas is quiet, thoughtful, and persuasive... all skills need for a C.J. to "reach consensus". Scalia is an outspoken intellilectural leader of the court -- traditionally NOT the role of C.J., but the person delegated to write the most opinions on the court (like Oliver Wendell Holms, Louis Brandeis, William O. Douglas, etc.)
3) For the first time ever, a well-qualified CONSERVATIVE black guy in CHARGE of one of three branches of government. He's far more worthy of the position than Martinez was to be Senator or Rice as POTUS. Liberals will burst a blood vessel that Republicans put a "minority" in charge of one of the three branches for the first time ever. Senator Byrd will drop dead of a heart attack.
Sir, I believe it is raining. You are raining on our excitement parade. You need to lighten up a little and stop watching all the screaming meemies. All the negativity is very unhealthy and we need to keep all the Conservative Pubbies alive,upbeat,campaigning,donating money and voting dems out. Believe it or not I believe we are ready for this fight. BRING EM ON!
I agree with you on recess appointments. My preference would be for Bush to nominate a solid, conservative intellect and then let the Republicans change the rules when the inevitable fillibuster bursts forth from the comity crew.
PPS. Judge Jones was a Reagan appointee and is considered one tough cookie. =) I think it'd also be good to have another woman on the Court since there's an eminently qualified candidate. BTW, she was general counsel of the Texas Republican Party before she became a judge.
Anyhow, we'll see. I'm sure GWB already knows what he's gonna do.
Yes, I saw it. The guy was condescending and arrogant. Burlingame was on point but emotional (as I would have been). Hearing his behavior afterwards infuriates me! What a jerk!
Here's more information on him from the same blog as above:
Profile of Potential Supreme Court Nominee - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales
| 11:55 AM | Anisha Dasgupta | Comments (0) | TrackBack (2)
Brief biography
Mr. Gonzales has served as Attorney General of the United States since February 2005. Prior to that, Mr. Gonzales served as White House Counsel to President George W. Bush (2001-2005), a Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas (1999-2001), Secretary of State for the state of Texas (1997-1999), and general counsel to then-Texas Governor George W. Bush. Mr. Gonzales has also been an attorney in private practice with the law firm of Vinson and Elkins in Houston (1982-1994).Mr. Gonzales was born in 1955. He attended Rice University and Harvard Law School, serving in the United States Air Force between 1973 and 1975, and attending the United States Air Force Academy between 1975 and 1977. He and his wife, Rebecca Turner Gonzales, have three sons.
Useful weblinks
Longer profiles of Mr. Gonzales are available through websites hosted by the White House , Wikipedia, and SCOTUSblog (Part I, Part II,Part III, Part IV).Discussion of what it would mean for President Bush to nominate Mr. Gonzales to the Supreme Court can be found on websites hosted by National Review and
the Alliance for Justice.Notable opinions
A majority opinion in Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixation Systems, Inc., 996 S.W.2d 864 (Tex. 1999), holding that the Products Liability Act required the manufacturer of a product to indemnify a seller that was forced to defend itself even though it did not sell the particular products that allegedly injured plaintiffs in underlying action. Justice Gonzales set out the "sound reasons we begin with the plain language of a statute before resorting to rules of construction" as follows: "For one, it is a fair assumption that the Legislature tries to say what it means, and therefore the words it chooses should be the surest guide to legislative intent. Also, ordinary citizens should be able to rely on the plain language of a statute to mean what it says. Moreover, when we stray from the plain language of a statute, we risk encroaching on the Legislature's function to decide what the law should be."A concurrence in In re Jane Doe ,19 S.W.3d 249 (Tex. 2000), agreeing that Doe had conclusively established that she was "mature and sufficiently well informed" to consent to an abortion without parental notification. Justice Gonzales addressed concerns that the court was substituting its judgments for that of the legislature by pointing out that "the words of the statute [are] the surest guide to legislative intent," that intent is "the polestar of statutory construction," and that, courts must put legislative intent "into effect, even if we ourselves might have made different policy choices."
One important point to be made is that statistically Chief Justices don't seem to change the outcome of the current court. So in the short-term he might not be a problem. But if he leans moderate he could defy a more strict contructionist court were that to happen in the future. Pound for pound he doesn't sound like a fair exhange for Rehnquist.
Last Fed, my students and I met with Thomas for two hours. From what he told us of how the Court operates, the CJ has NO substantial power other than a figurehead. He's one vote; moreover, Thomas said, the Court does NOT confer, debate, or even discuss cases before it until they all do a "go-around" and each state their (legal) opinions. After that, he said, there's 5-10 minutes of discussion, but he said few minds are ever changed, and it's more a "everyone-gets-his-say" kind of thing. It is the OPEN SEAT that is critical.
Last summer, up here in the bonus room, I was playing "golf" with my 3 year old grandson. When it was his turn, he said, "Now, Mimi, stand right there; don't go back and sit down at the computer."
Nailed.
Scalia's Raich concurrence renders him wholly unfit as a replacement imo, so pray *that* doesn't happen. I'd love to see Thomas elevated, but that's highly unlikely. My money's on "he ain't leaving". But if he leaves, then either Roberts or McConnell will replace him. That's my prediction, for the record.
Well, that isn't Gonzolez. I'm a bush-bot, but if he names Gonzolez, well, I can't support that. The Court needs to be getting MORE conservative, not less so.
A recess appointment in August would be good until January, 2007 -- 17 months. DO IT!!
Sink, I don't think Gonzolez is "anti-American," but he is NOT a more conservative vote than what we have there, and that is what we need. This slot has to go to a red meat conservative.
Nope. Well, I guess it depends: if Gonzolez is a pro-choice vote, he will be a shoo-in. But any pro-life vote, even as a one-for-one replacement, is going to get a HUGE battle.
I concurr, Luttig.
the President should wait until after the August recess
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.