Garza or Alito next: The Supreme Court do-over

Renew America ^ | October 30, 2005 | Chris Knight

[who_would_fardels_bear]

No. What it depends on is whether you believe that Luttig's understanding of the Supreme court refers only to its decision being super-stare decisis or whether his understanding refers to the entire rest of the sentence which includes the language "woman's fundamental right to choose".

I believe that his understanding is of the entire sentence, so I attribute none of the beliefs in the sentence to him.

He could have said something like this but it would have been rather clumsy:

"I understand the Supreme Court to have intended its decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), to be a decision of super-stare decisis with respect to what I understand the Supreme Court to consider a woman's fundamental right to choose whether or not to proceed with a pregnancy."

[Reagan Man]

>>>>I don't exactly know what you mean by a "point of technical precedent"...

From the case under discussion. I'll let Judge Luttig give his explanation. Key paragraph. LINK

As a court of law, ours is neither to devise ways in which to circumvent the opinions of the Supreme Court nor to indulge delay in the full implementation of the Court's opinions. Rather, our responsibility is to follow faithfully its opinions, because that court is, by constitutional design, vested with the ultimate authority to interpret the Constitution.

I think we're in agreement on the case in point and on Judge Luttig making a fine member of the SCOTUS.

[Giant Conservative]

In the key Casey decision, Alito ruled the right way; when the case reached the United States Supreme Court, Kennedy joined O'Connor and the rest of the leftist block in ruling the wrong way.

Alito is right.

Kennedy is wrong.

[pangaea6]

What are the odds on Garza? Anyone know? It seems with everybody's top 2 being Alito & Luttig they are bound NOT to be picked by GWB. I'm almost sure he wouldn't be bold enough to pick JRB.

[publiusF27]

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

Yes, for example...

Federalist 45

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State governments will here enjoy another advantage over the federal government. The more adequate, indeed, the federal powers may be rendered to the national defense, the less frequent will be those scenes of danger which might favor their ascendancy over the governments of the particular States. If the new Constitution be examined with accuracy and candor, it will be found that the change which it proposes consists much less in the addition of NEW POWERS to the Union, than in the invigoration of its ORIGINAL POWERS. The regulation of commerce, it is true, is a new power; but that seems to be an addition which few oppose, and from which no apprehensions are entertained.

I suspect that if Mr. Madison knew what New Deal judges would do with the power to regulate commerce, he would have entertained a few more apprehensions about it...

[flashbunny]

It's amazing how some consider Hugh hewitt to actually be a conservative.

He's a republican party man first and foremost.

[Giant Conservative]

Luttig's own words are that abortion is a "fundamental right" and that a woman has a "right to choose".

True. The next nominee to the United States Supreme Court should be the single best individual available, and that's Emilio Garza.

[TomasUSMC]

Yeah I tend to believe that a Marine on the Court would be not just a swing vote but one that would help sway things... if you know what I mean.

[cpforlife.org]

Don't know if y'all saw this. From Alan Keyes group. Interesting and sometimes suprising info on some big names. With some Pro-Life assurance on Alito.

Pro-Life PING

Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

Life begins at conception—NOT birth.
Birth is one day in the life of a person who is already nine months old.

[MHGinTN]

"Of course, that means no longer letting socially liberal oligarchs like Senator Kennedy and Senator Schumer set the rules." Left out was the chairgoon of the Senate Committee, the 'Scottish Law' idiot in plain clothing.

[campaignPete R-CT]

Ping

[Impy]

I never heard Myers gave that speech. “Once and for all”.

I supported her at the time. In hindsight I was yung and dumm.

I seem to remember freepers liked Luttig, the comments here like Luttig, the article says Luttig bad. A “super” precedent? Da fuq?

Thanks for bumping, interesting. I like the give Scalia two votes idea. Is

Alito was 1000% the tops, best pick since Thomas by far, those 2 dudes are the only real good things to come out of the Bushes.