It is the president's place to mold the court.
I'm sure these same law professors twist the meaning of separation of church and state.
The Democrats are not Democrats, they are Socialists. Their goal is to destroy the US Constitution in anyway they can, even piece by piece. These pieces are then referred to and pointed to as Precedent! Like Roe v Wade is unconstitutional, but the Socialist believe that this is a right given to women by the STATE, and it is not given to them by GOD! -- Which is as the US Constitution states. So they are trying to implement their Socialist Constitutional Law.
The same for the Chief and Associate Justices. They are not interested in following the US Constitution, if they get their way, then the US Constitution has been over run, and this action is now PRECEDENT!
They get sillier every day.
You know...warning: this is a fantasy post I suppose: I wish President Bush would just close the book on the way the Supreme Court has been appointed in the past. I'd like him to appoint someone as Justice that would just drive everyone on the left nuts and all the beaurocrats insane. So -- with disbelief suspended for a moment -- I'd like him to appoint Bishop T.D. Jakes (of the Potter's House in Dallas) to the Supreme Court, and then to announce his intention to appoint ordinary Americans who have done extraordinary things for the nation and who have a clear understanding of the original intent of the Constitution -- which is not a living document. (And just to be preachy, I'd like him to add there is only one living word and that's Jesus. But I know that will only happen in my increasingly evangelistic and strident Catholic dreams.)
The law and the Constitution be damned.
Here, Houston's liberal editorial writers very blatantly admit that their (liberal) judicial picks WILL ALWAYS vote their liberal ideas and international socialist agenda, NOT the actual law or the facts of each case.
This isn't horse trading!
I wonder if these dudes would be insisting on this if clintbilly was in charge.
Conservatives should vote against Roberts as CJ. Passing over two known conservatives to name a stealth as CJ is infuriatingly arrogant.
which part of "if you win the election, you get to appoint judges" don't these people understand?
Lawyers primarily exist to manipulate the law so juries find guilty people not quilty.
Their primary job function is to so manipulate the truth that you will believe the lies and reject the truth. Expecting a lawyer's opinion piece to be grounded in truth depends on the lawyer rejecting years of study and training.
Poppycock! The senate has no role in shaping the court - only in approving the nominee according to his qualifications.
Translation:
We lost the election, but we insist that a rabid Marxist be appointed to the court so our communist agenda can be carried out.
In other words, the President should forget about principles and use a "ideology quota" to maintain these professors legal theories in the future.
The Senate should quit their whining, do their damn job, and vote on Roberts.
Ideology is NOT a yardstick for judicial fitness!!!
If the Republicans would quit caving in to these childish, baseless outbursts from the left, the left would evaporate.
The only effect of naming the 2nd nominee, would be to afford the baby killing left an opportunity to defeat both.