I'm afraid that chain saws won't even help at this point.
Posted on 09/15/2005 6:33:45 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Now that President Bush has named appeals court Judge John Roberts to replace pro-life Chief Justice William Rehnquist, he must pull another name of out his hat to sit on the Supreme Court. Speculation in Washington is that Bush will name a woman or a minority -- or both -- to take the seat of outgoing pro-abortion Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
To the delight of pro-life advocates, the names of several pro-life women top the list of likely choices.
In a syndicated column on Monday, pro-life columnist Bob Novak reports that Judge Priscilla Owen, a pro-life advocate who sits on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, is Bush's stop prospect. Novak says Owen had a hush-hush meeting with the president last week.
As a former member of the Texas Supreme Court, Owen pleased pro-life advocates when she ruled against allowing teenagers to use the bypass provision of the state's parental involvement on abortion law. She said the teens were not mature enough to have the abortions and that the abortions were not in their best interest.
When Bush appointed Owen to the appellate court, she was one of several pro-life nominees that became victims of filibusters by Senate Democrats over abortion. Eventually, a group of 14 Democrats and Republicans struck a compromise to allow votes on the nominees in exchange for not changing Senate rules on stopping filibusters.
The Senate eventually approved Owen on a 55 to 43 vote with abortion advocates opposing her.
Novak writes that appeals court Judge Edith Clement of the 5th Circuit "was the runner-up to Roberts in the first selection process, but the word in legal circles is that she did not do well in her interview with the president and now is out of the picture."
Clement is described as a conservative jurist in the mold of Clarence Thomas or Antonin Scalia, that Bush favors. However, she does not have a long list of opinions on which abortion advocates could criticize.
Novak says pro-life Judge Edith Jones, also of the 5th Circuit, is another possibility as is Judge Karen Williams of the 4th Circuit, considered one of the most conservative of the women judges.
When the 5th Circuit denied a request last October by Norma McCorvey to approve her motion to overturn the Roe v. Wade ruling, Judge Jones issued an opinion blasting the Supreme Court's opinion in Roe and saying it needs to be re-examined.
She called Roe an "exercise of raw judicial power," and cited evidence McCorvey presented showing abortions hurt women. Jones, a Reagan nominee, wrote that the "[Supreme] Court's rulings have rendered basic abortion policy beyond the power of our legislative bodies."
If Bush chooses to go with a minority who is not a woman, speculation is that Judge Emilio Garza is at the top of the list.
Garza is a federal appeals court judge on the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Garza's opposition to abortion is beyond question. He wrote two separate opinions explicitly criticizing Roe v. Wade and suggesting it be overturned.
I essentially agree with everything you wrote.
Especailly about Clement. She is the least known of all of them.
Thankfully, the gossip is almost unanimous in that it will not be her.
Because it can never, EVER be repeated enough.
Mere words can never adequately express how much it tickles me to see so many (so-called) "true conservatives" on this board, nattering like chipmunks about how "abortion isn't really important," and yadda yadda yadda. Oh, for the days of Ronald Wilson Reagan, once more -- !
*sigh* I can still remember a time when this was a proudly PRO-life party...
n/p here.
""My point exactly. Unfortunately sheeple have framed this issue as "pro-choice" and "pro-life"""
You're from NY. So am I! Long Island.
And one thing you get from being a conservative in NY is the advantage of being able to argue with a liberal using liberalism. You cannot get into the value of life because to them it means nothing. But ask them if they are for all Doctors being licenced and then ask them to defend the Roe V Wade decision on the grounds of what is was- "Right to privacy."
Thank you! I am also PROUD to be Pro-life. We shouldn't have to compromise on this issue...abortion was, is, and always will be murder. We need more people that have the courage to say that!
I'm afraid that chain saws won't even help at this point.
You dont want a Judge you want Wonder Woman or the Mighty Thor.
No I think it was Thurgood Marshal but I could be mistaken !
I think the next danger from the hard left is going to be a call for separation !
The same preamble as the American civil war !
Some of these very passionate libbers are already talking about a separation and
an equal division of resources I think they want a divorce with property rights !
The proposed boundary is from the west coast all of California ,Washington, Oregon
and the east coast New York, Vermont, New Jersey, Connecticut and Massachusetts
plus a few more !Bi coastal America for the Blue State Libbers !
Conservatives never fought for Bork. Plus we were down a few senators.
You can't win the fight by backing away from it.
"By the way, I think that the next nominee will be important for many reasons. While Justice Roberts seems to be a capable and honorable man, I'm just not convinced that he is as conservative as Rehnquist, particularly on some of the social issues. I hope that I'm wrong."
No, he is moreso. His earlier legal briefings when he didn't have to pander to Kennedy, Biden, and Schumer are evidence enough.
Bush-41 did nominate O'Neil for a judgeship years ago. He didn't make it. Word is that his colleagues claimed that he lacked "judicial temperament."
Personally, I take that to mean he is smarter than them.
Thurgood Marshall was the first black to serve on the supreme court. Democratic senator from Virginia, Byrd is the only senator in history to vote against both black nominees to the supreme court, Marshall and Thomas.
Exactly.
I SO agree with you. The morals platform(abortion, the pledge, Saving marriage, Christian freedom, etc, ),and keeping the government from dictating our lives(what cars we can drive, foods we can eat, where people can smoke, etc) are the MOST important things, IMHO, facing the decision of who would be the next SC nominees.
After all, beyond that, and the stand on the military, and the WOT, there isn't that much difference in the two parties.
What they would have is an oft repeated phrase, Island Archipelago.
And, they had better watch it before the rest of the country wakes up and beats them into the ground for trying to make American into an inner city slum.
I'd really love to see a woman do the same to the likes of Teddy Kennedy.
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.