Posted on 07/01/2005 12:02:10 PM PDT by alessandrofiaschi
The DUers are organizing an Activist Group who commit to railroading the president's next USSC appointment. They want a minimum of 500 participants. I don't know that we need to organize, but FRers need to get actively involved. This is what they're up to:
WE ARE LIKELY TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
Voting in online polls.
Signing petitions.
Writing letters to Senators.
Writing letters to the Editor.
Sending emails to media.
Sending emails to friends.
WE ARE UNLIKELY TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
Go to protests.
Hold local events
I think he is only 50. He could be on the court for decades so I hope he is right for the job.
I am relieved too that it is not the CBS "news" guy John Roberts. ;-)
I am an early entry to their 500!
I oppose any nominee about whom this could be said.
FYI.
Read the article, but there didn't seem much substance to it. What has he said, where does he stand? What speeches has he made?
Those DUers were singing a different tune durign the Kelo case.... I guess they weren't that bothered by it.
I second that. This guy has all the hallmarks of a Souter. Put him on the Supreme Court with a life appointment and watch him make a beeline for the far left.
But you must consider also who is writing... don't worry, he is right!
So far on the D.C. Circuit, Roberts' votes have mainly fallen on the conservative side, but not always.
"I oppose any nominee about whom this could be said."
---
Oppose anything in here?:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/janicerogersbrown.htm
:)
Contrare, we FReep (protest), on all occasions. Ping me to your CounterFReep List.
NO!!!
Janice Rogers Brown would be my first choice for quite a number of reasons. Ideology for one. Easy confirmation for another. Political benefits for a third.
That is not the viewpoint of constitutional conservatives, including us, and including this judge. If the duly-enacted law says that the answer is the "liberal" one, a conservative judge should reach a "liberal" result. Likewise, if it requires torturing the language and meaning of the Constitution to reach a "conservative" outcome, a conservative judge should not do that.
The critical question is, will this judge obey and respect the Constitution if he becomes a Justice? If that answer is yes, then that is all we need.
But my prediction is that the nominee will not be an Anglo, white, male on this occasion.
John / Billybob
She's my pick 1000000%!
[[But my prediction is that the nominee will not be an Anglo, white, male on this occasion.]]
I have to agree. Personally, I would like to see Miguel Estrada brought back for the opening, it would be vindication for the lynching he received from democrats and the left wing special interest groups. Though I think it highly unlikely to occur, Estrada certainly would not fall outside the extreme circumstances of the fillibuster agreement, he has a short and narrow paper trail to be attacked on (one of the reasons he was targeted initially by the left). Even with his short paper trail, his conservative credentials, temperment and intelligence are above reproach, politically, the impact on the hispanic vote could be big.
I don't think it will happen, but I can dream.
You would have opposed Bork and Thomas then.
The job of the judge is not to make law but to carry it out, if a bunch of socialists make laws through the legistlative process (think NYC or Berkley), the judges should carry it out, not inflict their own opinion.
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.