Supreme Court Nomination Poll

The Fourteenth Circuit | May 28, 2003

[Bahbah]

A link to the poll, perhaps, Agrippa?

[Satadru]

Judge Easterbrook from the Seventh Circuit.

[Agrippa]

Here's a clickable link: Fourteenth Circuit Poll

[Bahbah]

Thanks.

[onyx]

ESTRADA!

[votelife]

Dear President Bush, With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.

[pulaskibush]

Miguel Estrada is the most qualified as far as I can tell. Even more than some on the SC bench now.

[cthomas]

Guys, Luttig is losing here. That guy would be amazing on the Court.

[Agrippa]

Very well-said, Votelife. I trust Bush won't let us down on this, but I am very nervous nonetheless. I was going to contribute to his campaign (as I did in 1999), but I think I am going to wait and see who he nominates (if there is indeed an opening) this summer. If it's Alberto Gonzales, or another so-called moderate (i.e., activist), my wallet will stay closed.

[Agrippa]

I agree that Luttig is a terrific judge, cthomas, truly in the mold of Scalia and Thomas. But we have to think politics here. The DemocRATS will fight tooth-and-nail to block a vote on him. Janice Rogers Brown of the California Supreme Court is just as reliable and because she is a black woman, the RATS will have a harder time blocking her.

Here are some quotes from Janice Rogers opinions that I have assembled from a variety of media reports. She is solid.

*

On an abortion parental-consent statute that the court struck down -- Brown accused the court's plurality of abrogating the constitutional rights of parents, described the court's thinking as circular, and called the case "an excellent example of the folly of courts in the role of philosopher kings." "When fundamentally moral and philosophical issues are involved and the questions are fairly debatable," Brown wrote, "the judgment call belongs to the Legislature. . . . They represent the will of the people."

*

California Supreme Court Justice [Janice] Brown wrote "With the approval of Proposition 209, the electorate chose to reassert the principle of equality of individual opportunity as a constitutional imperative."

*

Justice Janice Rogers Brown, while agreeing with the majority on what constitutes rape, dissented on whether the boy was guilty of it. She said that the boy may have had an honest and reasonable belief that the girl did not waive consent during sex, a defense to rape that California's courts have recognized since 1992. Brown wrote that the girl never clearly said stop. Also, Brown wrote, the high court's majority did not indicate how much time a man has to withdraw once a woman says stop.

"The majority relies heavily on John Z's failure to desist immediately. But it does not tell us how soon would have been soon enough," Brown wrote. "Ten seconds? Thirty?"

*

In a separate dissent [in the Nike case now being heard by the United States Supreme Court], Justice Janice Rogers Brown accused the court of essentially muzzling companies by adopting a simple standard for defining commercial speech. The court "creates an overbroad test that, taken to its logical conclusion, renders all corporate speech commercial speech," she said.

*

On a California hate speech law: "I can think of no circumstance in which this court has brushed aside such an important constitutional protection as the right to free speech on the basis of so little analysis or authority," wrote Justice Janice Rogers Brown. "I can conceive no imprisonment so complete, no subjugation so absolute, no debasement so abject as the enslavement of the mind."

*

Justice Janice Rogers Brown, in a withering dissent, contended that the San Francisco ordinance represented a "taking" of private property by the government.

"Theft is theft even when the government approves of the thievery," Brown wrote. "Turning a democracy into a kleptocracy does not enhance the stature of the thieves; it only diminishes the legitimacy of the government."

Brown complained that the decision means that property rights in California are now "hollow."

"The right to express one's individuality and essential human dignity through the free use of property is just as important as the right to do so through speech, the press or the free exercise of religion," she wrote.

*

In a 1997 decision that allowed cities to clear the streets of gang members who annoy or intimidate residents, she wrote: "Liberty unrestrained is an invitation to anarchy."

*

She backed drug testing for both job applicants and current employees up for promotion in government, calling it one of the trade-offs of being a public employee. "Such choices are neither easy nor comfortable," she wrote. "But that is life. Sometimes beauty is fierce; love is tough; and freedom is painful."

*

When the court ruled that the governor and Legislature could appoint members of the State Bar Court, a power that previously belonged solely to the state Supreme Court, Brown took a jab at colleagues in her dissenting opinion: "The preservation of a viable constitutional government is not a task for wimps."

*

In a relatively obscure antitrust case, she offered this reminder to her senior colleagues: "The quixotic desire to do good, be universally fair and make everybody happy is understandable. Indeed, the majority's zeal is more than a little endearing. There is only one problem with this approach. We are a court."

[Regulator]

Politically speaking, you're right...Justice Brown has always shocked me with the bluntness of her instrument. She just doesn't go along with the "let's twist the Constitution and make it do what it ain't supposed to do" crowd.

[lilylangtree]

Freeped!

Whom should President Bush nominate to fill the next vacancy on the Supreme Court?

Samuel Alito 2%
Janice Brown 26%
Miguel Estrada 30%
Emilio Garza 0%
Alberto Gonzales 9%
Orrin Hatch 2%
Edith Jones 0%
Michael Luttig 13%
J. Harvie Wilkinson III 9%

Other view suggestions 9%

[votelife]

my pick was Luttig, but considering politics he may not be the best choice.

[votelife]

Here's a link to fax your US Senators for free to support Estrada's nomination:

http://www.salememail.com/specialoffers/faxtosenate/

[Sonny M]

What no Fred Thompson, he may not be a solid conservative, but he plays one of TV.

[votelife]

FREEPer ESTRADA Activism (VANITY)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/847037/posts

[Republican Wildcat]

Gonzalez would probably be more like O'Connor than Souter. Gonzalez would make a good replacement for Stevens, and Janice Brown a good replacement for O'Connor.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Whatever the individuals name he/she/it must be a mixture of black, mexican and oriental with an amerind great-great-great grandfather. Starting in college he successively was an orthodox then a reformed jew, followed by a Muslim(both shia and sunni)then sustained a deep meaningful conversion to hindu. When in the throes of a spiritual crisis he/she/it became shinto, went through the three great variants of the christian religion finishing grandly as a wiccan agnostic.

He/she/it married his/her/its significant other in a Vermont ceremony but ran into a crisis and quickly married a lesbian. He now lives in Southern California with his pet chimp. He/she/it is of course a Graduate of Bryn Mawr.

He/she/it hates war, but supported the troops.

Just 30 seconds before he/she/it is sworn in as an associate justice the Chief Justice makes him/her/it a citizen after finding out he/she/it crossed the border illegally at Nogales, Arizona in 1984 and after experiencing intense thirst in the Arizona desert enrolled in college and law school at the same time. With the help of a government grant he/she/it passed through both courses in one year.(So says his/her/its resume)It is expected that his/her/its experiences shall make him/her/it a profound judge!

[Theodore R.]

I said it first some time back.
GONZALES = SOUTER
GONZALES = SOUTER
GONZALES = SOUTER

Of that I am convinced.