[TomasUSMC]

In 1997, Garza joined his colleagues on the 5th Circuit in striking down a Louisiana law that gave judges excessive authority to deny abortions to juveniles, but his vote came with a caveat.

---

Well I was for Garza till I read this. I don't give a crap about his caveat. Now I say: No to Garza and No to Gonzales.

[nickcarraway]

If he is one the Supreme Court, he doesn't have to be bound by their decisions like he does on lower courts.

[MarcusTulliusCicero]

This was the only action he can be permitted to make. Appeals judges do not have the authority to overturn SCOTUS decisions, however distasteful. Instead he followed the law as he swore in his oath to do, and expressed his displeasure at doing so in no uncertain terms. If elevated to the Supreme Court he then has the authority and the duty to vote to overturn it. This is perfectly consistent with an originalist interpretation of the rule of law and also acknowledges that he is not one to usurp authority that is not his to begin with.

[JohnnyZ]

Stick with your fellow Marine.

He did everything he could do in that circumstance.

[jwalsh07]

Tomas, for Garza to do anything differently would brand him an activist. He did exactly as he should, he followed the law and made it clear that the law sucks.

Cut your fellow jarhead a bit of slack here.