Posted on 08/22/2005 5:34:50 PM PDT by wagglebee
California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, whose vote on Supreme Court nominee John Roberts could guide other Democrats, said Monday she will scrutinize his views on abortion and congressional authority to set social policy.
She called the impending debate over Roberts' nomination a "big, big deal."
"I don't think in the last couple of decades there has been a Supreme Court appointment that could more tip the balance of the court," Feinstein said in a speech to several hundred Silicon Valley business executives. "That's how mega this vote is."
In July, President Bush nominated Roberts, a federal appeals court judge, to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Senate Judiciary Committee hearings are set to begin shortly after Labor Day.
Feinstein, a moderate Democrat, has emerged as a pivotal figure. Judiciary Committee Republicans have enough votes to send Roberts' nomination to the full Senate for consideration, but Feinstein's committee vote could influence other Democrats.
As the only woman on the 17-member committee, Feinstein said she has a "special role and a special obligation" in grilling Roberts — particularly on his views about the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion.
"I happen to feel that it would be very difficult for me to vote yes on a nominee I thought would overturn Roe vs. Wade," she said.
Feinstein met privately with Roberts shortly after he was nominated. Since then, Roberts' writings on many matters that come before the court — including sex discrimination, race relations and environmental protection — have emerged in thousands of pages of documents released by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and the National Archives.
Roberts served in the Justice Department and the White House counsel's office during the Reagan administration.
Feinstein said she had not yet been briefed on the content of those documents.
In her remarks Monday, Feinstein also said the Supreme Court under Chief Justice William Rehnquist had restricted congressional authority to pass legislation.
She said the Rehnquist court had used the Constitution's interstate commerce clause and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to weaken or invalidate at least three dozen federal laws in the last decade. She said those included the Violence Against Women Act and the Brady handgun law.
She described those two constitutional provisions as the "the primary sources of congressional power" to enact social policy.
Whether Roberts favored such an approach would heavily influence her decision on whether to vote for him, Feinstein said.
"I would like to come away with the view that he was not going to be one who would further restrict and bind lawmakers' hands and keep them from enacting legislation that the people of this country want," she said.
No you idiot! Rehnquist has tried to stop judges from legislating from the bench.
Feinstein is often called a moderate, but she may cause a lot of trouble in these hearings. We all know that abortion is the absolute bottom line for most of the Democrat base.
What about Ginsburg's appointment in 1993?
Didn't that "tip the balance of the court" or was most of the Supreme Court justices already so left-wing that her appointment didn't matter that much?
You mean you can't just pass anything regardless of it's lack of Constitutionality, poor baby DiFi.
That one was a tipping point as she replaced the moderate and anti-Roe Justice Byron White.
Well I hope Bush has questioned Roberts about abortion too.
There is only one question you can ask him and expect an answer to, and it's the same question we should ask every appointee by a liberal President: Do you have an opinion on this topic?
If the answer is "yes" then he's prejudged the issue and should be blocked.
Since he is a lawyer not a doctor, I assume he has never performed an abortion also, being a man, not a women he has never had one. DiFi is an idiot.
Na, the tipping point was Thurgood Marshall > Clarence Thomas.
In anycase this woman is a complete fraud. What happened to the "primary source of congressional power" when all those gay marraige bans were enacted? Or any number of laws struck down by liberal courts?
Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime.
Bill would make it a criminal offense to harm or kill a fetus during the commission of a violent crime. The measure would set criminal penalties, the same as those that would apply if harm or death happened to the pregnant woman, for those who harm a fetus. It is not required that the individual have prior knowledge of the pregnancy or intent to harm the fetus. This bill prohibits the death penalty from being imposed for such an offense. The bill states that its provisions should not be interpreted to apply a woman's actions with respect to her pregnancy. Reference: Unborn Victims of Violence Act; Bill S.1019/HR.1997 ; vote number 2004-63 on Mar 25, 2004
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life.
S. 3 As Amended; Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. Vote to pass a bill banning a medical procedure, which is commonly known as "partial-birth" abortion. Those who performed this procedure would then face fines and up to two years in prison, the women to whom this procedure is performed on are not held criminally liable. This bill would make the exception for cases in which a women's life is in danger, not for cases where a women's health is in danger. Bill S.3 ; vote number 2003-51 on Mar 12, 2003
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. Vote on a motion to table [kill] an amendment that would repeal the ban on privately funded abortions at overseas military facilities. Bill S 2549 ; vote number 2000-134 on Jun 20, 2000
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions.
This legislation, if enacted, would ban the abortion procedure in which the physician partially delivers the fetus before completing the abortion. [A NO vote supports abortion rights]. Status: Bill Passed Y)63; N)34; NV)3 Reference: Partial Birth Abortion Ban; Bill S. 1692 ; vote number 1999-340 on Oct 21, 1999
Voted NO on disallowing overseas military abortions.
The Murray amdt would have repealed current laws prohibiting overseas U.S. military hospitals and medical facilities from performing privately funded abortions for U.S. service members and their dependents. Status: Motion to Table Agreed to Y)51; N)49 Reference: Motion to table Murray Amdt #397; Bill S. 1059 ; vote number 1999-148 on May 26, 1999
Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women.
Feinstein is endorsed by EMILY's list, a pro-choice PAC: EMILY’s List operates as a donor network, recommending pro-choice Democratic women candidates to its members, who contribute directly to the candidates they choose. In the 1999-2000 election cycle, EMILY’s List members contributed $9.3 million to pro-choice Democratic women candidates. In its 16-year history, EMILY’s List has helped to elect four women governors, eleven women to the United States Senate and 53 women to the U.S. House of Representatives. “Women continue to be the power players in Democratic politics,” said Ellen R. Malcolm, president of EMILY's List. “In 2002, redistricting could result in as many as 75 open seats, creating multiple opportunities to recruit and elect pro-choice Democratic women.” Source: Press Release on Diane Watson (CA-32) victory 01-EL1 on Apr 11, 2001
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record.
Feinstein scores 100% by NARAL on pro-choice voting record For over thirty years, NARAL Pro-Choice America has been the political arm of the pro-choice movement and a strong advocate of reproductive freedom and choice. NARAL Pro-Choice America's mission is to protect and preserve the right to choose while promoting policies and programs that improve women's health and make abortion less necessary. NARAL Pro-Choice America works to educate Americans and officeholders about reproductive rights and health issues and elect pro-choice candidates at all levels of government. The NARAL ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position. Source: NARAL website 03n-NARAL on Dec 31, 2003
Expand embryonic stem cell research.
Feinstein signed a letter from 58 Senators to the President Dear Mr. President:
We write to urge you to expand the current federal policy concerning embryonic stem cell research.
Embryonic stem cells have the potential to be used to treat and better understand deadly and disabling diseases and conditions that affect more than 100 million Americans, such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, and many others.
We appreciate your words of support for the enormous potential of this research, and we know that you intended your policy to help promote this research to its fullest. As you know, the Administration's policy limits federal funding only to embryonic stem cells that were derived by August 9, 2001.
However, scientists have told us that since the policy went into effect more than two years ago, we have learned that the embryonic stem cell lines eligible for federal funding will not be suitable to effectively promote this research. We therefore feel it is essential to relax the restrictions in the current policy for this research to be fully explored.
Among the difficult challenges with the current policy are the following:
While it originally appeared that 78 embryonic stem cell lines would be available for research, only 19 are available to researchers. All available stem cell lines are contaminated with mouse feeder cells, making their therapeutic use for humans uncertain.
It is increasingly difficult to attract new scientists to this area of research because of concerns that funding restrictions will keep this research from being successful. Despite the fact that U.S. scientists were the first to derive human embryonic stem cells, leadership in this area of research is shifting to other countries.
We would very much like to work with you to modify the current embryonic stem cell policy so that it provides this area of research the greatest opportunity to lead to the treatments and cures for which we are all hoping. Source: Letter from 58 Senators to the President 04-SEN8 on Jun 4, 2004
Dianne Feinstein is an extremist on killing innocent life.
something about this strikes me as hilarious.
it didn't "tip the balance" because that only counts when the balance "tips" to "life".
She wasn't worried about that appointment because it was in the bag, Ginsburg was one of them.
Feinstein a moderate? Only if fanatical baby-killing types are now regarded as "moderate"!
Moderate democrat? That's funny I thought she was pro-abortion and anti-gun.
She can ask all the questions she wants. She'll get few answers. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, as I understand it, set the all time record on refusing to answer questions, declining even the vaguest queries. And not without good reason - when you;ve worked for the ACLU, very few of your social attituides will stand up to close scrutiny. The Republicans, of course, voted for her unanimously because Republican's first concern is not to rock the boat.
So if Roberts wants to answer little or nothing, he can do it and apply the "Ginsburg standard."
I don't understand this logic. It would be reasonable, in selecting a baseball umpire for the majors, to show a candidate various pitches and ask how he'd call them. One would not disqualify someone from serving as an umpire on the basis that he'd "prejudged" pitches.
If having expressed opinions on a matter were a basis for disqualifying someone from judging it, then that would imply that judges should be disqualified from looking at any manner similar to any that has come up previously while they were on the bench. After all, opinions a judge expressed while sitting on a case are probably indicative of a far greater degree of prejudice regarding future rulings than those expressed as vague hypotheticals.
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.