You're "undue burden" gobbly gook regarding abortion in the Casey fiasco ranks right up there with finding "emanations in the penumbra" of the Constitution.
Alas, we still have this thing on the court for another 25 years or so also.
Posted on 07/01/2005 7:14:03 AM PDT by SueRae
Hearing on Fox News
He is a gun grabber. He supported the assault weapons ban. Recall that the banned weapon were not really assault weapons but only guns that "looked" scary.
He has been involved in some cases in the Texas Supreme Court that give the strong impression that he favors Roe vs Wade.
He recently called illegal aliens "otherwise law abiding citizens" and suggested that local law enforcement should not be enlisted in upholding our immigration laws.
He was a board member of a La Raza affiliate organization. La Raza are the ones that have the motto which roughly translates to: For the Race everything; for the rest nothing.
That is enough for me. He would be the Hispanic version of David Souter.
Wow! Let the games begin! I wish we could find another Thomas for the court.
Agreed - I'm not getting any hopes up - the Dems will browbeat LimpFrist and the GOP "moderates" will join hands with them. We will get another Souter (thanks Bush 1 with your golfing buddy Clinton).
LOL...I'm sure Bush is saving Fox for another henhouse.
They have a copy of her letter--reading live now.
No more Empty Souters.
Fox readying a copy of the letter O'Connor sent to the president.
And you thought they were going hysterical over the war.....this will put them over the edge FOR SURE.
Any nominee should be grilled to see where they stand on the 9th and 10th amendments, the commerce clause, general welfare clause, 2nd amendment, incorporation doctrine, and original intent. If they don't come down on the issues like Clarence Thomas, they should be passed over. We can't tolerate more wishy-washy justices like O'Connor and Kennedy, let alone another Souter-like justice appointed by a Republican. If Bush's primary concern is to appoint someone because of his ethnicity (e.g., Gonzales) rather than his strict constitutional stance, even Republicans should vote against confirmation. It he nominates someone who shares Thomas's outlook and it makes Bush feel good for that person to be a Hispanic, fine. I'm not interested in the race/ethnicity card; I just want a dependable, original-intent justice.
Seems pretty squishy on RKBA. Membership in La Raza does not bode well. Some will try to say he's pro-abortion, but that's a really bad misreading of a TX Supreme Court ruling he made. One positive is that his record (especially on the TX decision) shows that he is anti-judicial activism, i.e., he believes in applying the law as written, not as he would like it to read.
You're "undue burden" gobbly gook regarding abortion in the Casey fiasco ranks right up there with finding "emanations in the penumbra" of the Constitution.
Alas, we still have this thing on the court for another 25 years or so also.
Up on CNN.com too....
Make that reading.
Gonzales supports the AWB, hence does not support the Constitution.
To hell with what the Commies want, pay back time
This is going to get entertaining. I may just buy a little popcorn machine and set it up next to my recliner.
The news is making the rounds now everywhere.
Rehnquist stays O'Connor goes?
I doubt anyone in Washington is surprised.
I still wonder why the Reps didn't go nuclear last month.
The Summer could get interesting.
let the games begin!!!
Ted Olsen, first.
I love that guy.
Except she's not even on the short list.
W. should actually use McCain to get his pick through. The media love McCain, and McCain could argue that whoever is picked is not "extraordinary". This would also give McCain a chance to establish his "bona fides" with the base of the party.
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.