President Bush nominated DC Circuit Court Judge John Roberts to the US Supreme Court. The Feminist Majority, the National Organization for Women, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and the National Abortion Federation all immediately announced their intentions to oppose Roberts for the position.
I am extremely disappointed that the President did not appoint a centrist woman to fill Sandra Day OConnors seat on the Supreme Court, said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority. We are now going back to tokenism for women on the highest court in the land.
Everything we know about Judge Roberts record thus far indicates that he will be a solid vote against womens rights and Roe v. Wade, Smeal continued. If he is to be confirmed by senators who support womens rights, he must say where he stands on Roe and the right to privacy. The burden is on him.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1446803/posts
I am extremely disappointed that the President did not appoint a centrist woman to fill Sandra Day OConnors seat on the Supreme Court, said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority. We are now going back to tokenism for women on the highest court in the land.
Head's up, E. Smeal: appointing a woman because she is a woman is the DEFINITION of tokenism.
Should Bush have nominated a man, a woman, a white, a black, a Latino, a Jew, and Indian?
Here's a novel approach to appointing a Supreme Court justice we could try: Look at the pool of qualified candidates ... and pick the most qualified. (Why can nobody look a reporter in the face to say this? God help this country if we're not all thinking it.)
As to the original thread question of 'parsing' Roberts' brief: Attorney's almost always use "we believe" and "we assert" and other "we" language to zealously represent their client (as they are bound by the rules of ethics to do). For the attorney to differentiate "his" beliefs/assertions from a non-lawyer client would act to discredit them - this would not be "zealous representation."
Additionally, I am a Marine, a lawyer, and a female, for anyone interested in where my beliefs/assertions are coming from.