Posted on 03/06/2009 9:15:49 AM PST by EternalVigilance
In a move that should give social conservatives great pause, Governor Sarah Palin has appointed a former board member of Planned Parenthood to the Alaska State Supreme Court.
Palin appointed Anchorage Superior Court Judge Morgan Christen to the state’s highest court on Wednesday. Along with Christen’s former board member status with Planned Parenthood.
There is no disputing Palin’s appointment of Christen will cause the Alaska Supreme to lean left and will ensure a more activist court when it comes to gay marriage, and abortion. The Christen appointment is key because she replaces justice Warren Mathews, one of the dissenting votes striking down the parental consent legislation.
The Governor, who early on won the support of Alaska liberals after she pushed through an enormous, unprecedented tax increase on the oil industry, seems to be back in their good graces with this appointment.
ADN liberal bloggers responded to Palin’s Supreme Court appointment writing,
“Ohmigawd!??The governor's been taken over by space aliens.??What an improvement!”
“Wow. Way to go Palin! I can't believe I just said that. But hey, credit where credit is due.”
“Glad to see a woman in the position to balance out the court. Good for Palin for keeping bible thumper beliefs out of the court system and honoring the separation of Church and State.”
“This is the one good action that Sarah Palin has taken over the past three years. And I have no problem admitting it. Great pick!!!! So even if the wing-nut parental consent bill passes, the state Supremes now have enough votes to overturn it as unconstitutional.”
Granted Palin would have had to put up a fight to block the appointment of the far left Christen to the court. Under Alaska law the judicial council made up mostly of liberal lawyers gets to filter out candidates who do not hold a leftist background. The governor must pick from the names forwarded.
But former governor Frank Murkowski during his term fought the process and at first refused to name any of the names submitted to him. The liberal media beat him up pretty bad over it and he eventually caved.
If Governor Palin would have taken on this fight, it probably would have ended up in court. If she had taken up the fight and asked for all the candidates’ names that applied to be forwarded, it would have brought to the public’s attention that trial lawyers control the third branch of government in Alaska. But with the governor refusing to spend any political capital on this issue, it is sure to disappear from Alaska’s political landscape.
The governor caving into trial lawyers also guarantees an activist court will continue to push its agenda on the people of Alaska. It will continue to stand between you and your child, continue to redefine marriage and block development.
Palin appointing Christen kills any move by the legislature to pass parental consent legislation. The new court with Christen on it will surely strike down any new laws. This is one of the reason Palin’s caving is confusing. Just recently held a news conference standing side by side with conservative lawmakers sponsoring new parental consent legislation.
Refusing to fight for parental consent laws is risky for Palin. It clearly will help her avoid controversy from the liberal media. But conservatives supporting her won't like the fact she appointed a former Planned Parenthood board member to Alaska’s highest court.
Many of the governor’s conservative supporters have ignored her high taxes and liberal anti free market policies. They support her simply because she says she is pro-life and is open about her faith. But the Christen appointment proves that while the governor lives the pro-life message in her personal life, she is not willing to spend political capital on the issue in her political life.
*sighs* And AGAIN...
Repost!
xxxx
Article 4, § 5 of the Alaska Constitution: “The governor shall fill any vacancy in an office of supreme court justice or superior court judge by appointing one of two or more persons nominated by the judicial council.”
She had no choice in the matter. Pick the hardcore leftist, or the one who was less left.
She went with the gal who was less left.
Also, did or does Palin know that Christen is pro-abortion. The group was not planned parenthood at the time, they didn’t promote abortions at the time, the application linked above makes no mention of it.
You are accusing Palin of nominating a pro-abortion candidate when we DON’T KNOW that Christen is pro-abortion. You are making the assumption based on what the MSM says. You should know better.
Again, the more important question- Why is this Alaskan’s for Life promoting the more liberal, pro-abortion Smith? Don’t you think that question raises red flags about their charge?
xxxx
Please read through the thread before jumping to a conclusion.
Let’s talk for a moment about what that template is: when Mrs. Palin entered the Governorship she was immediately confronted with a stand-off between the courts and the legislature over the provision of state employee benefits to “same-sex” “couples.” The court had issued an opinion that the state had to provide the same. The legislature had checked them with legislation. Governor Palin sided with the court, vetoed that legislation, and thereby checked the legislature, with the result that Alaska now pays such benefits to its employees.
I’m not “using his lies.” I’m simply reporting that Governor Palin just appointed someone who is going to continue the destruction of the very moral basis of our free republic. If you can’t live with that, tough.
Notice how they deliberately escalate tension among group members, pitting one faction against another to make a preordained viewpoint appear "sensible," while making opposing views appear ridiculous. If you disagree with xx person's conclusion, you automatically oppose the 'very moral basis of our free republic'. If you look through the entire thread, you'll see that the actual premise of the charge is challenged, but the argument always comes back to this..
“She HAD a choice — to pick NEITHER of these liberal justices and let the Alaskan Judicial Council make the pick.
The last we want is for her to let the council choose among those two.
Please post some sources on Alaskan law that says that she had the options that you claim anyway.
Please source something among all of your nonsense posts.
I "don't get it" because your position, and that of Governor Palin, destroys the very basis for the moral, political, and legal, defense of innocent human life.
Browsing the Web brings up some interesting things...
http://www.ajc.state.ak.us/Retention04/christen04.pdf
http://www.ajc.state.ak.us/Retention00/SmithE00.pdf
*will do more after his exam ends*
The Alaska Judicial Council is a constitutionally created state agency that evaluates the applications of persons seeking judicial appointment and nominates two or more qualified applicants to the governor for appointment to fill existing or impending vacancies. - * Article IV, Section 5 of the Alaska Constitution; Titles 15 and 22 of the Alaska Statutes
Procedures for Nominating Judicial Candidates
Alaska's system of selecting judges is a merit selection system intended to limit judicial appointments to what one framer of the Alaska constitution termed "the best available timber." Constitutional framers hoped to avoid a system of selection which would award judicial offices based on partisan politics, political fundrasing ability, or special interests. Alaska's constitution and statutes require that Alaska judges be appointed by the governor from a list of appointees submitted by the Alaska Judicial Council after a rigorous screening; judges are required to periodically appear on the ballot (stand for retention) to allow voters to decide whether they should be retained in office.
University of Alaska Justice Center
Also, this appointment is subject to a subsequent election:
The appointed justice must be approved by the voters on a nonpartisan ballot at the first statewide general election held more than three years after appointment; thereafter, each justice must participate in another retention election every ten years.
Those are the facts that have been laid out in the over 200 posts here which everyone else but you and Eternal Vigilance seem to comprehend...deal with them and quit the childish name calling.
We have a problem because a majority do not except such views. Open debate is hindered due to Roe v. Wade.
Return the issue to the states. Honest debate can ensue. People can be convinced of natural law and why innocent human life should be defended from conception onward.
We have few cards to work with. I'm going with the one with the best chance of saving lives faster.
In the case of appointing a replacement to the Supreme Court, the governor CONSTITUTIONALLY has NO CHOICE in whether to appoint or not appoint.
Two totaly different circumstances, but nice try.
Which other unalienable rights do you want to do this with?
Free speech? The right to peaceably assemble? Religious expression? The right to petition government for redress of greivances? The right to keep and bear arms? Trial by jury? Private property? What??
The state constitution does not specify a time constraint on the Governor. She could leave it vacant until they offer up a nominee who comports with their sworn oaths to defend innocent human persons.
Do the clear opening words of the Alaska constitution and sworn oaths to defend and uphold the same have no meaning to you?
Oh, so now you are calling me pro-choice because you don’t have any reasoning skills? Get lost...I have done more for the pro-life effort than you ever could.
Thank you for the compliment.
thaDeetz
Good for you.
Do you believe that all officers of government have a sworn imperative duty to protect innocent human life, per the Preamble to the US Constitution, the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments to the same, and the explicit words of all fifty states’ constitutions?
This makes me very sad, you were once a stalwart fighter for justice and life. I have known you here and never knew Douglas Kmiec, but in your own way, you have now effectively joined him as one who brings strength to the pro-death side. Sad!
Nice straw man argument there. The Alaska Constitution is pretty clear about what the governor can and cannot do, especially in appointmets to the court, but I suspect you’d rather she fall on her sword, get impeached, thrown out of office in the name of your agenda.
That’s ridiculous, and ignorant. You should be ashamed of that post.
If some people, especially those whom God has given power, don’t take bold and courageous steps to restore respect for our constitutions, even if it costs them personally, this republic is going to be gone. Dead. Kaput. Wake up.
Show me where the states have the right to sanction the taking of life without the due process of law. Show me where the feds do, for that matter. This is a specious argument.
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.