Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: advance_copy

this worries me. Yahoo reported that he stated in his appellate confirmation that:

"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."


513 posted on 07/19/2005 5:39:11 PM PDT by Bubbatuck (Demonrats: The End is Near!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies ]


To: Bubbatuck
"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

This is what an Appellant judge should do -- follow the law. A USSC justice, on the other hand, gets to make the final guess.

555 posted on 07/19/2005 5:44:20 PM PDT by Smedley (I'm better than dirt. Well, most kinds of dirt. I mean not that fancy store bought dirt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies ]

To: Bubbatuck
this worries me. Yahoo reported that he stated in his appellate confirmation that:
"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

Not to worry, He didn't say he agreed with the decision. Here he was speaking as an Appellate judge who is expected to apply the law as determined by the USSC. However, as a SC justice he could join a majority, if one emerged and the right case presented, to overthrow Roe.

615 posted on 07/19/2005 5:52:48 PM PDT by NilesJo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson