Posted on 07/03/2005 10:52:40 AM PDT by Carl/NewsMax
Sen. Joe Biden said Sunday that if President Bush nominates recently confirmed Circuit Court Judge Janice Rogers Brown to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats will launch a filibuster.
"If [Bush] sent up Edith Jones, I could assure you that would be a very, very, very difficult fight - and she would probably be filibustered," Biden told CBS's "Face the Nation."
In the next breath Biden corrected himself, saying, "I misspoke, I misspoke. Janice Rogers Brown is what I meant to say."
Asked whether that would break the Senate's much heralded compromise last month not to filibuster judicial appointments except under "extraordinary circumstances," Biden explained:
"[The Supreme Court] is a totally different ball game . . . A circuit court judge is bound by stare decisis. They don't get to make new law. They have to abide by [legal precedent]."
Asked if O'Connor's retirement was more likely to provoke a filibuster than would have been the case had the more conservative Chief Justice William Rehnquist retired, Biden responded: "Probably."
Gonzales? That's Spanish for "Souter," right?
I like Estrada. It would make it up to him for the coals that have been already heaped upon his head.
Brown for SCOTUS!!!
http://www.neoperspectives.com/janicerogersbrown.htm
Man is not free unless government is limited. There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.
-Ronald Reagan
Where government advances - and it advances relentlessly - freedom is imperiled, community impoverished, religion marginalized and civilization itself jeopardized.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
Believe me, you cannot create a desert, hand a person a cup of water, and call that compassion. You cannot pour billions of dollars into make-work jobs while destroying the economy that supports them and call that opportunity. And you cannot build up years of dependence on government and dare call that hope.
- Ronald Reagan
Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
Today we are told we must choose between a left and right or, as others suggest, a third alternative, a kind of safe middle ground. I suggest to you there is no left or right, only an up or down. Up to the maximum of individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism; and regardless of their humanitarian purpose those who would sacrifice freedom for security have, whether they know it or not, chosen this downward path. Plutarch warned, “The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations, and benefits.”
- Ronald Reagan
We no longer find slavery abhorrent. We embrace it. We demand more. Big government is not just the opiate of the masses. It is the opiate. The drug of choice for multinational corporations and single moms; for regulated industries and rugged Midwestern farmers and militant senior citizens.
- CA Justice Janice Rogers Brown
Yeah, Judge Broen is my favorite.
Gonzales is a putrid mix of authoritarianism that won't let go of the illegitimate power accrued by FDR stacked court, and ethnic tribalism that wants to keep our borders porous while laying more intrusive laws on the law-abiding. Could you think of a worse choice among Republicans?
Bas#@$%, the supreme court isn't supposed to either. To serve in the house or senate, you should be required to understand how our government is supposed to work.
Let's take a look at what compromise supporter Joe Biden said in reference to whether or not there would be a filibuster if Janice Rogers Brown is nominated to the US Supreme Court:
-----------------------------------------
"[The Supreme Court] is a totally different ball game . . . A circuit court judge is bound by state decisions. They don't get to make new law. They have to abide by [legal precedent]."
-------------------------------------------
My two thoughts, these are the guys you made 'the deal' with. They are going to go back on their word, but of course that is no surprise, that is their track record. But, most importantly, Joe Biden is saying that Supreme Court Justices make NEW law. So you trust a guy who hasn't a clue as to what powers the constitution gives the judicial branch. Could it be that you also think the Supreme Court can make new law. Please speak out on this and let us know if you see this as a breaking of the "compromise' you were part of. And also let us know if think the Supreme Court's purpose is to make new law, or look at the constitution and see what the framers of it meant. I know that I am not perky Katie Couric or a member of the mainstream media (I am a lowly constituent), but I would love a response from your office.
Nominate her and reveal the Dems for what they are.
I don't agree with you often, but you are right: Brown would have to be backed by the nuclear option. I hope Rove has pictures of that bowtied weasel from Rhode Island outside his favorite bathhouse.
If W puts up Gonzales, we are starting a new political party. We have been working for decades to change this Pro-death court by voting for Republicans. We have given them the White House, the House of Representatives, and the Senate. If W or the Senate turns on this opportunity, I am personally bolting and forming a new conservative party that is both socially and fiscally conservative. I have had it with these "political" gooks.
based on your idea, Bush not cannot appoint her - since Biden is now already on record as tipping the Dem strategy, what you are saying is that if we know she will be attacked, we can't place her in that position to begin with. Guess what, with that strategy, we lost this issue, because any person that we appoint that will not be attacked, is going to be another Souter.
if we lose a confirmation vote on her, or fail on the cloture vote - then what do we do?
I have said no such thing. That is what you are saying. I'm saying the President will stick behind whomever he appoints and it won't be a political game of switch. He has backed everyone of his nominees and not left one out to dry. A couple eventually requested their names be withdrawn and he has done so.
You are the one that said send her name up and then send up Luttig when she is trashed.
Meaning that the Democrats admit that Roe was new law.
Implicit in your recommendation is the assumption that the Democrats are an organized party that makes logical decisions in their own best interests. I rather like to think of them as a leaderless gang that has no real agenda and consistantly shoots themselves in the foot.
Here lemmings! The cliff is over there!
no, I am saying IF this happens to her - send Luttig up next. I can't control what the Dems will do, neither can Bush. What I said to you was that if we go into this process by saying that we won't appoint anyone who will be smeared, because its not right to send somone up that we know is going to be demonized - then we lose right out of the gate, because the Dems and the MSM and all the left wing pressure groups are going to smear any conservative. so who do we send up then? Another Souter?
As I said, if Biden and the Dems would rather simply approve Brown - its fine with me.
The time is now to use the nuke. This is the big one, the balance changer. Sandy is going to stay until someone is confirmed -- there won't be any 4-4 decisions. We've GOT to break up this court before they have us all in irons. We have to make this court turn 5-4 the other way.
Will the imbecile Pelosi still breathlessly announce "it's almost like the word of God?" I bet she doesn't, but don't forget she said that.
Tell the RINOS that there will be hell to pay if they don't back President Bush's candidates. They better enjoy the remainder of this term, because it will be their last.
Whatever.... Maybe I misunderstand the above statement you made. Have a nice one. Oh, I don't think it will be Brown, jmo.
Anyone right of Vlad Lenin will be fillibustered.
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.