Thomas: Abortion Holds Judiciary Hostage

AP on Yahoo ^ | 11/11/05 | Jay Reeves - ap

[NormsRevenge]

TUSCALOOSA, Ala. - Federal court appointments are being held hostage by the abortion issue, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas said Friday in advocating a briefer, less intrusive confirmation process.

Speaking to law students at the University of Alabama, Thomas said former clerks and other lawyers often tell him they're not interested in federal judgeships because of the potential for bruising confirmation battles.

"I think that's a problem when the stars are beginning to say, `Thank you, but no thanks,'" said Thomas.

Thomas, who opposes the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, said the fight he faced during his own confirmation hearings in 1991 went back to abortion politics. Thomas was accused of sexual harassment, charges he referred to at the time as a "high-tech lynching" for an "uppity" black man.

"I think we all should be honest with one another that the only issue, the central issue in all of this, is abortion. It's not the other things that people throw out," he said. "The whole judiciary now is being held, in a sense, hostage to that one issue."

Without giving specifics, Thomas said the confirmation process should be scaled back and not allow for seemingly every aspect of a nominee's life to be laid bare.

"We cannot say that all the examination of nominees has improved the court," said Thomas.

Thomas said he has never met a judge who attempted to impose a personal agenda through decisions, so attempting to uncover such people through extensive hearings is pointless.

"The whole process of trying to ferret out the personal agenda through the confirmation process isn't an endeavor that I think is worth the price we are paying," said Thomas. "I think the only thing it does is rats out the agenda of the people asking the questions."

Thomas didn't mention President Bush's nomination of Judge Samuel Alito for a vacancy created by the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, but he said he doubted the withdrawal of Bush's first nominee, Harriet Miers, was linked to abortion.

Thomas spoke fondly of the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, and he said his replacement, John Roberts, has a similar personality.

"He is younger, he is smart, he is a nice guy," Thomas said. "He is absolutely fabulous, and we are lucky to have him."

[Alberta's Child]

Another great judiciary ping.

[irishjuggler]

Justice Thomas, of course, nails it here. The single best thing the SCOTUS could do for federal judiciary is to wash its hands of the abortion issue once and for all. There's only one way to do that (i.e., kill Roe v. Wade).

[GSlob]

Since USSC itself decides which cases to take and which to leave untouched, they could wash their collective hands by simply not taking these cases - and nobody could force them to do otherwise. Doing nothing is also doing.

[jwalsh07]

Well, I hate to have to say it but I disagree with Justice thomas. I think judicial nominees should answer any question posed to them on decisions already rendered by the SCOTUS.

[irishjuggler]

Since USSC itself decides which cases to take and which to leave untouched, they could wash their collective hands by simply not taking these cases

It's too late for that approach. The Supreme Court has built up this ridiculous framework of Roe, Casey, etc., that lower courts must interpret. To leave that all in place and refuse to hear further appeals would mean that disagreements among the circuits would never be resolved. Even more confusion and chaos would result. They've created a monster that must be either fed or killed.

[RKB-AFG]

Thomas speaks kindly of Roberts. Hopefully that is a sign that Roberts will be a strong conservative voice on the Court.

[joyspring777]

I completely disagree. Talk about cases they have already ruled on. Explore their constitutional understanding...but essentially licensing litmus tests...which is what forcing them to answer every and any question...NO WAY!

This is long term senselessness.

[cpforlife.org]

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

[McGavin999]

Roe v Wade should NEVER have been touched by the Supreme Court other than to say "It's a state issue". This thing should be fought out on a local level, with the people directly involved making the decision. If you live in a state that approves of abortion, and you do not, move to a state that does not approve. If you live in a state that forbids abortion, and you don't like it, move to a state that does.

Abortion is NOT a political issue, it is a moral issue and unless it is fought on that ground, it will never be resolved.

For over 30 years, this country has been torn apart over something that should never have entered the political arena.

[Aquinasfan]

The single best thing the SCOTUS could do for federal judiciary is to wash its hands of the abortion issue once and for all. There's only one way to do that (i.e., kill Roe v. Wade).

The freedom to kill unborn babies with impunity is the single defining issue for the Left, so they can never retreat.

[wildandcrazyrussian]

Not only that, but abortion was never a known national issue(*) before the 1973 Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton cases which came out of the blue. I was in college 1967-1971 and NEVER even heard the word, much less be aware that the "Supreme" Court was going to overturn centuries of the common law understanding, and a century of actual legislation which forbade it (except for the normal understanding about life of the mother), which had been led by the American medical profession of that time.

In other words, our side never had a chance to put any PRO-abortion judges through the examination process they are putting the good guys through now. It became "precedent" by stealth, and that is why it has been distorting politics for 32 years and wil do so for many decades to come. I don't know a single person who believes we lost fair and square. The fact that the legal doctrine of "stare decisis" makes it impossible to act against RvW/DvB, unless some day we get the SC to overturn it itself, is exactly the type of mindset of Socialism ("We have decided everything for the good of the people, and it is settled.")

(For example, I was watching politics pretty carefully when Johnson and Goldwater ran in 1964 and Hunphrey, Nixon, and Wallace in 1968. It was never mentioned as an issue.)

[little jeremiah]

Later pingout.

[TAdams8591]

"I think we all should be honest with one another that the only issue, the central issue in all of this, is abortion. It's not the other things that people throw out," he said. "The whole judiciary now is being held, in a sense, hostage to that one issue."

It's all about abortion and was during his confirmation hearing and has been for a long time, Justice Thomas is exactly correct. The level of scrutiny the left puts seemingly pro-life judicial nominees through has been way out of hand and akin to a witch hunt. And no equal level of scrutiny of liberal candidates exists on the right.

However, stealth candidates should not be nominated and scrutiny of all candidates should be lowered to more healthy and equal levels, regardless of political ideology.

[TAdams8591]

Many moral issues are political issues that eventually get resolved in the political arena. That's the way it has always been and the way it will always be. Abortion is and will remain a political issue whether or not Roe vs. Wade is overturned. There is nothing you or anyone else can do to change that reality.