Posted on 10/30/2005 1:17:40 PM PST by Giant Conservative
Here we go again!
give me a break. Luttig is as good a choice as any.
Luttig...pro-aborton?
FORGET HIM!!!!
Isn't this Alan Keyes organization?
In the wake of his weeks-long pro-Miers tantrum/meltdown: this can never, ever be too emphatically stated.
But Roe is just bad law.
Please use original titles.
Thanks.
I expect Bush will probably nominate him then to please Ted Kennedy.
Please refute the arguments put forth in the original post, rather than just stating your opinion with no supporting references.
This post reveals the first serious negative charge of Luttig to appear on FR, and deserves more than a "Me too" posting.
You ain't gonna get Jesus.
But such a person has no moral compass other then the dotted I and the crossed T of the law. There are a whole host of things that are not explicitly forbidden in our constitution which are bad for the country.
Actually if you were to read the Federalist Papers you would be shocked at all the things that Publius assured us could never happen which have indeed become the law of the land, simply because they were not forbidden in the constitution and were subsequently enacted by a congress and approved by a court with no moral input.
He is not pro-abortion according to the pro-life blogs. Keyes outfit once again cherry-picked info to make the guy look bad. They want people to rule their way even if it goes against the law.
I was opposed to Miers, but this is absurd. If you can't be happy with Luttig, you are not going to be happy. The choice is most likely going to be Luttig or Alito.
And there are WAY more issues more important than abortion.
She withdrew because she would have been shot down in the Senate.
She did not have the votes.
Get ready for more nit-picking over the nominees. It's not over.
I will have to read up on Luttig from several sources.
I really don't know anything about him other than what I read in this article.
That quote in BOLD looks pretty damning, though.
Could you guys freep this poll, the Seattle PI is so biased... they're gunning for Bush and Cheney.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1512005/posts
I understand that he is pro-life, and I believe he would have never vote for Roe or Casey. However, a lower court cannot rule against a higher court. So to a judge in his position, he had to rule with the Supremes. That doesn't mean anything if he becomes a Supreme himself. Only Supremes can overturn Supremes. Well, in theory the people can do it through the amendment or impeachment process, and Congress can limit their jurisdiction. But reality seems to be another matter.
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.