Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Owen emerging as candidate for high court
Ft. Worth Star-Telegram ^ | 9/22/05 | Dave Montgomery

Posted on 09/22/2005 1:13:39 PM PDT by Crackingham

Texan Priscilla Owen, who was the focal point of a bitter, four-year nomination battle for a federal appeals court, is emerging as a candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court as President Bush seeks a replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Owen, who sits on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, is among at least a half-dozen Texans believed to be under consideration for the impending vacancy. Other candidates from the state are U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and several of Owen's 5th Circuit colleagues.

.......

Although Owen has been on the appeals court less than four months, the former Texas Supreme Court justice is believed to be high on the list of potential candidates for O'Connor's seat, according to lawmakers, legal experts and judicial advocacy groups monitoring the search for a nominee.

Speculation began intensifying late last week after Washington columnist Robert Novak described Owen, a former corporate lawyer from Houston, as the front-runner and reported that she had met privately with Bush this month. The White House has not confirmed the meeting, and Owen has declined requests for interviews.

Texas Republican Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn said that they would welcome Owen's nomination to the high court but that they have no indication whether Bush is moving toward naming her. Senate Democrats and leaders of a coalition who fought to block her nomination to the 5th Circuit vowed to replay the battle if she becomes Bush's nominee.

Owen was nominated to the 5th Circuit in 2001 but confirmation did not come until May, when the Senate voted 55-43 after a compromise negotiated by a bipartisan group of senators. Opponents portrayed Owen as a conservative extremist while supporters defended her as an outstanding jurist who had been endorsed by 15 former presidents of the State Bar.

"I know they're [the White House] pretty interested in her. There's no question about that," said Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice, which opposed Owen's nomination to the 5th Circuit. Aron, maintaining that Bush should replace the moderate O'Connor with someone of a similar judicial temperament, said nominating Owen to the post would be "a slap in the face."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: priscillaowen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

1 posted on 09/22/2005 1:13:40 PM PDT by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

No one predicted Roberts. No reason to think the press will get it right this time.


2 posted on 09/22/2005 1:14:34 PM PDT by Huck (Are there any fiscal conservatives left?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Sounds like a great candidate to me.


3 posted on 09/22/2005 1:15:49 PM PDT by Uncle Hal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Aron, maintaining that Bush should replace the moderate O'Connor with someone of a similar judicial temperament

Why? Shouldn't winning an election count for something?

4 posted on 09/22/2005 1:17:08 PM PDT by sourcery (Givernment: The way the average voter spells "government.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

I'd like this, but as the next poster notes, Roberts came out of nowhere. I don't think anyone knows what this pres. will do.


5 posted on 09/22/2005 1:18:07 PM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Mr. President, nominate a strict constructionist and let the bloodshed commence! The socialists will filibuster, the repubs will nuke 'em and you will have your nominee.


6 posted on 09/22/2005 1:18:07 PM PDT by trubluolyguy (I am conservative. That is NOT the same thing as Republican. Don't place party over principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

I personally think everyone's overlooking Edith Jones, myself.


7 posted on 09/22/2005 1:18:46 PM PDT by TheBigB (I will punch the next person who confuses "you're" and "your". Seriously. Don't test me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Aron, maintaining that Bush should replace the moderate O'Connor with someone of a similar judicial temperament, said nominating Owen to the post would be "a slap in the face

I'd chip in an extra donation to the national committee if Bush would nominate a "slap in the face" nominee.

8 posted on 09/22/2005 1:19:23 PM PDT by kjam22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

I still want Janice Rodgers Brown!


9 posted on 09/22/2005 1:20:50 PM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Hal

Sounds like she's one that even Ann Coulter would have to agree with.


10 posted on 09/22/2005 1:21:29 PM PDT by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy

Amen! Let the chips fall where they may!


11 posted on 09/22/2005 1:22:45 PM PDT by joyspring777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
Why? Shouldn't winning an election count for something?

Bush didn't win the election. He stole it. /Moonbat mode

12 posted on 09/22/2005 1:23:06 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (Cindy Sheehan, Pat Buchanan, John Conyers, and David Duke Are Just Different Sides of the Same Coin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LS

Actually, Roberts didn't really come out of no where. He and Littig were talked about fairly extensively before hand. But all of us were thinking that Bush would nominate a true blue conservative judge. He didn't.


13 posted on 09/22/2005 1:23:06 PM PDT by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TheBigB

I think you may be right about Jones. She has been called the "female-scalia" but doesn't have the burden of being attacked like Owen or Brown by Lib's, that means that the White House could frame the debate and her personality early and the left would have to play catch up.


14 posted on 09/22/2005 1:23:57 PM PDT by jbwbubba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

D Michale Luttig

Dims will filibuster and get nuked. We will have out man.

Save Owens for when someone drops a house on Ginzberg.


15 posted on 09/22/2005 1:27:30 PM PDT by ByteMercenary (9-11: supported by muslims everywhere.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kjam22

"I'd chip in an extra donation to the national committee if Bush would nominate a "slap in the face" nominee"

Me too! The liberals are going to scream, protest, slander, make outrageous demands, riot, speak contemptuously, and make flat-out lies, no matter who President Bush nominates. Let's really give them someone to screech about. After the totally partisan assault the libs/media led against Bush during hurricane Katrina they deserve to face a real battle. Liberals don't have the moral high-ground. They aren't compassionate. They legislate laws that the PEOPLE continuously vote against. There's absolutely no reason to be civil at this point.


16 posted on 09/22/2005 1:31:54 PM PDT by Sweet Hour of Prayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy

Then the dims can appeal the nomination to, uhh, to the, well the Supreme Court! Thats who!


17 posted on 09/22/2005 1:36:20 PM PDT by Pylot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Sounds like the same thing that happened with Roberts. There was a name of a controversial nominee floated. The libs locked and loaded their fax machines with attack press releases, and then the Prez caught them flatfooted by naming the unexpected Roberts.


18 posted on 09/22/2005 1:42:41 PM PDT by Busywhiskers ("...moral principle, the sine qua non of an orderly society." --Judge Edith H. Jones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kjam22

ME TOO !!!!!!!!!


19 posted on 09/22/2005 1:47:50 PM PDT by berkley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nikos1121

But all of us were thinking that Bush would nominate a true blue conservative judge. He didn't.

I don't agree with this. I watched the Roberts hearings and to me he seems like exactly what conservatives have been talking about for 40 years. A person who reads the law and tries to figure out what was meant when it was written. I just can't see him blowing in the wind like Souter or O'Connor.

Guaranteed, he's going to be in the majority of some decisions we might not like. But so was Rehhquist (Miranda) and Scalia (flag burning). He knows the Constitution preserves Liberty and I think he will struggle to preserve the Constitution. A true conservative.


20 posted on 09/22/2005 1:50:09 PM PDT by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson