To: Howlin
Yes I would. Lord, if someone is being put up for the Supreme Court they should be smart and articulate and courageous enough to defend their beliefs.
If Roberts was that good, he would take on this stinking Fienstink and defend the Pro-Life Cause. This way it looks to all the pro-choicers that Roberts is afraid and/or not capable of debating and defending Pro-Life.
1,742 posted on
09/13/2005 1:07:15 PM PDT by
TomasUSMC
(FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM.)
To: TomasUSMC
Another "he's not conservative enough" unappeasable heard from.
1,773 posted on
09/13/2005 1:10:39 PM PDT by
Howlin
(Have you check in on this thread: FYI: Hurricane Katrina Freeper SIGN IN Thread)
To: TomasUSMC
That would be a violation of the canons of legal ethics, as the case will come before the court.
The Actual Rule
[Kathryn Jean Lopez 09/13 04:05 PM]
“[A] judge or a candidate for election or appointment to judicial office shall not … with respect to cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court, make pledges, promises or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of the office….”
— ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 5A(3)(d)(ii) (2003), (emphasis added).
1,798 posted on
09/13/2005 1:14:52 PM PDT by
NeoCaveman
("Government is not the solution, it is the problem" - Ronald Reagan)
To: TomasUSMC
It's not his job to "defend the pro-life cause." It's his job to be a judge.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson