From Gore/Bush Debate Oct.3, 2000
"MODERATOR: On the Supreme Court question. Should a voter assume -- you're pro-life.
BUSH: I am pro-life.
MODERATOR: Should a voter assume that all judicial appointments you make to the supreme court or any other court, federal court, will also be pro-life?
BUSH: The voters should assume I have no litmus test on that issue or any other issue. Voters will know I'll put competent judges on the bench.
People who will strictly interpret the Constitution and not use the bench for writing social policy. That is going to be a big difference between my opponent and me.
I believe that the judges ought not to take the place of the legislative branch of government. That they're appointed for life and that they ought to look at the Constitution as sacred. They shouldn't misuse their bench.
I don't believe in liberal activist judges. I believe in strict constructionists. Those are the kind of judges I will appoint.
I've named four in the State of Texas and ask the people to check out their qualifications, their deliberations. They're good, solid men and women who have made good, sound judgments on behalf of the people of Texas."
These are the Presidents words.
I've named four in the State of Texas and ask the people to check out their qualifications, their deliberations. They're good, solid men and women who have made good, sound judgments on behalf of the people of Texas.
Judges are elected in Texas, but Bush was nonetheless able to appoint four to the state Supreme Court to fill vacancies: James A. Baker, a state appellate judge and political supporter (not the former secretary of state); Greg Abbott, who had been a lower court judge and is now Texas attorney general; Deborah G. Hankinson, a defense lawyer; and Gonzales, who was Bush's general counsel and Texas secretary of state. Often included in the list of Bush appointees is Harriet O'Neill, whom Bush appointed to a lower court but who was elected to the high court. Pragmatism Drove Bush In Texas Judicial Choices
By Lois Romano
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 8, 2005; Page A04
Gonzales was a demonstrated judicial activist in the Texas parental notification series of cases. Cites to the cases below, followed by a couple excerpts.
http://www.findlaw.com/11stategov/tx/2000_6txsc.html
TX Supreme Court 00-0224
Gonzales Concurring Opinion
Enoch & Baker Concurring Opinion
Abbott Dissenting Opinion
Hecht Dissenting Opinion
Owen Dissenting Opinion
Below cites are from: Texas Law on Parental Notification
The links are to the Texas Supreme Court case archives, and provide ZIP files. The archived year 2000 cases consist exclusively of WordPerfect renditions of the opinions. The archived year 2002 link include html and pdf renditions, in addition to WordPerfect.
A fair (i.e., accurate) summary of the majority opinions.
- Jane Doe 1(I), No. 00-190, 19 S.W.3d 249 (Tex. Feb. 25, 2000);
- Jane Doe 1(I), No. 00-224, 19 S.W.3d 300 (Mar. 10, 2000) (Hecht, J. dissenting from order reversing the court of appeals after remand);
- Jane Doe 1(II), No. 00-224, 19 S.W.3d 346 (Jun. 22, 2000)
- Jane Doe 2, No. 00-191, 19 S.W.3d 278 (Mar. 7, 2000)
- Jane Doe 3, No. 00-193, 19 S.W.3d 300 (Mar. 13, 2000)
- Jane Doe 4(I), No. 00-213, 19 S.W.3d 322 (Mar. 22, 2000);
- Jane Doe 4(II), No. 00-317, 19 S.W.3d 337 (Apr. 11, 2000)
- Jane Doe 10, 78 S.W. 3d 338 (April 19, 2002) (No link.
- Jane Doe XI, No. 02-0933, 2002 92 S.W.3d 511 (Tex. Oct. 10, 2002)
The Legislature directed trial courts to make findings of fact and conclusions of law. See Tex. Fam. Code § 33.003(h). The trial court in this case did so. Under well-established precedent, a reviewing court must presume that the trial court's judgment in this case is supported not only by its express finding that Doe was not sufficiently well informed, but also by its implied finding that Doe was not mature enough to make the decision to have an abortion without notification of a parent. Doe had the burden of establishing both elements of that ground fro proceeding with an abortion without notification. Nothing in the Family Code indicates that the Legislature intended to override the appellate principle that an omitted finding on one ground for relief will be presumed to support the judgment.http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/texasstatecases/sc/000224d3.htm <- Owen Dissent
Often a court construing a statute wishes that it had more information about what the Legislature intended. Since issuing its first opinions construing the Parental Notification Act, this Court has received extraordinary assistance from Members of the Legislature in reviewing the history of the statute. The Senate and House sponsors of the legislation, together with eight other senators and forty-six other representatives, have informed the Court as amici curiae that its construction of the statute to date is incorrect, and they have provided citations to the hearings and debates on the statute to support their view. While the Court is certainly not bound by the post-enactment views of legislators, the Court is wrong to simply dismiss the parts of the legislative record that these legislators have cited in support of their position. Relying instead on a few minor, isolated comments it can find in the legislative history to support its own view, and disregarding significant portions of that record to the contrary, the Court dares the Legislature: If we have not got the statute's meaning right, then amend it. "This," says the Court, "is precisely how the separation of powers doctrine should work."http://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/texasstatecases/sc/000224d2.htm <- Hecht dissent
One can safely assume the George Bush's political rhetoric has been fairly steady regarding the proper function of judges in our government. George Bush considers Gonzales to be a strict constructionist. That should give an open-minded thinking person reason for closer scrutiny of the pick, in advance.
That is not personal against President Bush, not from me anyway. The fact that I don't trust him on this matter doesn't mean I think he is a liar, or bad intentioned. He is a politician - and in the end, his actions have political ramifications.