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.
Some here don't want that little thing called THE LAW to interfere with their opportunity to bash Palin.
It’s an unjust law, because it is unconstitutional. The Governor, and every officer of governement, have sworn an oath to defend innocent human life.
Laws passed by the Legislature which are unconstitutional are null and void, and we have three co-equal branches of governement to stand as a check and balance against unconstitutional breaches of the people’s rights. The Governor has an equal duty to follow that constitution, no matter the cost to themselves personally.
The problem with this is none of these laws define when life begins, that’s why we need both State and Federal fights to define life as beginning at conception, until we get those, the courts don’t recognize a baby as a protected life until it is born. Spending your energy fighting against those who promote the federalist approach is adding to the delay and difficulty of getting a law that defines an unborn baby as protected life.. Your phrasitical, holier than thou way ensures more and more delays until we get the ‘perfect’ solution that may never come.. How many babies will die while you hope for your prefect way?
All you are is ensuring there is a division in the pro-life movement where instead of the federalists and constitutional approach camps both view each other as the enemy instead of fighting the real enemy, the abortion providers.
Both sides need to work together to win- you are doing everything in your power to ensure abortion ends.
How many more babies are you willing to sacrifice for your quest for “only the perfect” law?
Or is the perfect law your goal or are you actually more interested in tearing down the “R” to promote your own third party, unborn babies be damned- they are just a pawn to you?
Here's the 5th Amendment. Read it. You might learn something.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Positive law cannot overrule constitutions.
I don’t support any law or politician who ends their sentences with “and then you can kill the baby.”
IF, this is the EV we knew for all these years? Anyone stop to think that maybe someone is playing us? Would someone like EV, who was a very strong, logical Conservative on this thread really use the lives of unborn babies as a pawn? Would he really be using this much energy to divide our side?
You have become what you claim to hate. Your reasoning is more specious than the most whacked-out Stevens opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court.
You have decided that since there is an unproven allegation that a potential court nominee might not be pro-life, that the Governor has the authority to interpret the state constitution on her own to allow her to completely abrogate another part of that constitution.
Seriously, what drugs are you on?
I am afraid things have changed. The thread has the evidence, my 276 above has my opinion.
As a side note, the nominee will come up for a retention election so the voters can vote them out if they so choose:
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.
Then I guess it would be the old pressure system then. There ain't no way I'd be signing that in, law or no law. I'd go to the mat before I made such an awful choice.
That’s not what I said, nor implied and you know it, that is a diversionary tactic to try to back the debating opponent in a corner he can’t get out of. What is your real game here? Your actions here are nothing like the EV many of us have known for years. The real EV would never play with the lives of babies like this. The real EV would fight the battle on all sides. The real EV would not be focusing all energy on splitting the fight against abortion.... hmmmm...
That’s consistently been my argument.
It is not EV who is splitting the fight on abortion. The official position of the Pro-Life movement IS EV's position. It is the states-righter's that are splitting things up
I suppose that is a theoretical possibility, but after more than 45 years as a political activist, I have seen some startling about faces by people I thought I understood. Sometimes it was because of Drugs (see Karl Hess), sometimes it was because of sex (see Garry Wills), sometimes there is no explanation (see Douglas Kmiec).
That's why principled people need a new strategy, and new leaders. That's what the personhood movement is all about.
Even the author of Roe, in the decision itself, admitted that if the personhood of the unborn is acknowlegded than THEY ARE PROTECT EVERYWHERE IN THE TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATE BY THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
I still haven’t seen any convincing proof the nominee is pro-choice. EV’s meme “Fagan says so” is not legitimate. Fagan is merely a radio host (who I had never heard of before)...but then so are Art Bell and Alex Jones. I don’t believe them either.
State’s righter’s like me want this battle fought on all fronts, we don’t make either side the enemy. We want the national people to fight while we fight on the State battle. We don’t go around saying that the national-only people are really pro-abortion because they don’t agree with us, we just see it as a tactic difference.
I am a State’s righter because I believe it brings the fastest change to start saving babies and it will also give us a guidepost when we know when to pull the trigger on a national Constitutional amendment. I don’t for an instant, believe the national folks are pro-death.
It is like the Air Force and the Marines both involved in a battle.. they are both battling the same enemy, just from different logistical viewpoints. When do you ever see someone from the Air Force saying that a Marine fighting on the ground is actually working for the enemy because he isn’t flying also?
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.