Bush May Tap Brown for Supreme Court

MSNBC, NEWSWEEK ^ | 2-9-2003 | Daniel Klaidman, Debra Rosenberg and Tamara Lipper

[nwrep]

Justice Janice Brown

Supreme Court: Moving On, Moving In, Moving Up

A vacancy could open up in the U.S. Supreme Court soon

By Daniel Klaidman, Debra Rosenberg and Tamara Lipper NEWSWEEK

Feb. 17 issue: It's been nine years since the last vacancy opened up on the U.S. Supreme Court. That historically long drought could end this year with at least one resignation. Eager White House aides are stepping up preparation efforts, vetting candidates and contemplating a special media operation to deal with a potential confirmation battle.

Other observers think Bush could take another approach, appointing California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown instead. Brown is a conservative African-American who's ruled against affirmative action and abortion rights. Her nomination would let Bush add the court's third woman and second African-American in one swoop. And White House lawyers have already interviewed her. Tom Goldstein, a Washington lawyer who argues cases before the court, believes Brown could even get the nod for chief justice. "An African-American female nominee is not going to be filibustered," he says. She doesn't have a record that will stop Democrats in their tracks. And after months of bitter Senate fights over nominations to lower courts, that could have an appeal all its own.

[bert]

...I'll admit to prejudice.....

or at to least scepticism.

The scepticism results from the source....... Newsweek is not to be trusted in such matters.

[sneakypete]

I'll admit to prejudice: I have trouble trusting anyone from California. Is this woman for real?

I think it would be VERY helpful to know what the affirmative action and abortion rights cases she ruled against had for a base. Did she rule that midgets didn't have a right to be point guards for the NBA? Did she rule against partial birth abortion?

Remember,Bush-1 and his pals were the ones who sold us David Suiter as a conservative. Granted,he seems more conservative than anybody in the Bush family,but the same thing could be said for Clinton.

[sneakypete]

As to any unwillingness to do such a thing to a black female, two words: Denise Majette!

I don't know who Denise Majette is,but it's clear after what happened to Clarence Thomas that the left can make any claims or accussations they want,and the media will never call them on it.

[sneakypete]

"Alameda County has the authority to prohibit the operation of gun shows held on its property," Justice Carlos R. Moreno wrote in his first majority opinion since taking office in October.

This judge is a incompetent fool,and needs to be impeached. Neither Alameda County or any OTHER County "owns" land. They hold it in the public trust. It is NOT private property,it is by DEFINITION public property! As such,they have no right to place restrictions on the public that are forbidden by either/both the state and the feral constitutions.

In sharp dissent, Justice Janice Rogers Brown said such an initiative by a local government "exceeds its regulatory authority."

I have to admit,I'm starting to like this woman.

[Puddleglum]

She is certainly respected by the legal scholars I know. She has a reputation for being extremely intelligent and has a very Constitution-oriented outlook, i.e. no legislating from the bench.

I am all for her, especially if she is a strict Constitutionalist. No more "living document" stuff - it's like building your house on sand. Her recommendations sound superlative.

I can't hope but wish Bork himself could be renominated someday, but the Pubbies would need a 60+ majority to swing that. Of course that might literally spark the second Civil War.

[sneakypete]

"No mention is made [in the state Constitution] of a right to bear arms," Brown wrote.

So much for me liking her. Has anybody told this dimwit about a thing called the "US Constitution" or the "Bill of Rights"? No state has the legal or moral authority to restrict the rights RECOGONIZED AND GUARANTEED by the US Constitution.

[sneakypete]

You have to wonder whether folks read what is posted, or just catch what they want and form their opinions from that

If Trotsky were to appear with a hatchet still sticking out of his forehead,most FR posters would be rabid in their support of him as long as Bush backed him.

[sneakypete]

They are illegally bought and sold daily so this issue either way, is NOT AN ISSUE, with me.

You don't care about average Americans being turned into "instant felons" merely because they own a TOOL the US Constitution GUARANTEES they have the right to own?

[AppyPappy]

The Constitution does not guarantee you the right to own any weapon you want. All rights have a "within reason" clause. Of course, big scary guns (TM) fit inside the "within reason" clause because they do not function differently from any other gun.

[sneakypete]

THERE IT IS! CHOOSE BROWN AND LOSE VOTES. GREAT STRATEGERY

She is the perfect candidate for Ali Bubba Bush. NOBODY panders like he panders,and he thinks/knows the vast majority of the Republicans will vote for him anyhow,and most of them will have no idea what Brown's ideas are on freedom. Plus,he gets a percentage of the leftist whites who are on guilt trips over slavery,as well as a few black votes he wouldn't have gotten otherwise. She is his ideal candidate,a token with the credentials who is a rabid moderate who has been accused of being a conservative.

[Barset]

Yes, she's for real. Judge Brown is intellectually honest, deeply reflective, and is already a target for the Left, in the smarmiest manner they can muster. They have been busy burrowing into her past, and re-interpreting her words and actions to provide red meat for Senator Schumer's grinder.
Her race is almost a disadvantage here, since her superb qualifications will be trampled on in the rush to destroy her as a "traitor" to her race by black politicians always eager to keep their places at the Dems' trough.

[sneakypete]

I doubt she or anyone can touch gun collecters rights.

You still don't understand. It has NOTHING to do with gun collectors rights. It has to do with the rights of every American citizen. The fact that you personally may never choose to exercise that right doesn't mean you haven't suffered a very real loss if the right to make that choice is illegally taken away from you. PLEASE note I said "illegally",because there is no legal way this right CAN be taken away.

[sneakypete]

I've heard the argument many times here on this forum that the 14th does not apply to the States when we are talking about other Civil Rights laws.

The right to self-defense is NOT a Civil Right. It is a natural right that can not be legally regulated. No governement has the moral or legal standing to even try to regulate it. Granted,they have been doing this for decades now,but that doesn't make it legal or right.

[sneakypete]

I hope Bush is able to nominate Judge Bork while he's in office.

I don't know why people keep saying this. Bork is at least in his early 70's by now. What we need is somebody in their early 50's who will be there for a while.

[sneakypete]

There must be THOUSANDS of qualified jurists and other citizens who could do the job and about whom we'd NEVER need to worry.

Wrong. If they are white males,they couldn't possibly be qualified. Thomas Jefferson couldn't get a nomination today.

[sneakypete]

there never was any evidence he would be definitely conservative.

I said back then that the fact that he had never married or had a girlfriend and was still living with him mama should have been a good tipoff that we didn't need him on the SC. What does somebody like that know about the lives the rest of us live?

[FreedomPoster]

>>As to any unwillingness to do such a thing to a black female, two words: Denise Majette!

Yes, and Denise was just a truly moderate Democrat, or campaigned as such (we'll see how she votes, that story isn't really written yet), running against the incumbent Democrat from the crazed-radical-Communist wing of the Dem Party, McKinney.

This woman is apparently a conservative, they'll really bring out the heavy artillery/smear campaign.

[sneakypete]

In particular, we don't know if the briefs challenged the law on second amendment grounds, or on state constitutional grounds.

It doesn't matter. In the long run what she wrote amounts to saying the county commissioners have the right to control public properties like private properties,and this tells you all you need to know about where she thinks the power should lie. She picked the power of the government over the freedom of the public,and was clearly wrong to do so. Read her ruling.

[BlackRazor]

So much for me liking her. Has anybody told this dimwit about a thing called the "US Constitution" or the "Bill of Rights"? No state has the legal or moral authority to restrict the rights RECOGONIZED AND GUARANTEED by the US Constitution.

Does a state judge have the authority to strike down law on federal grounds? I thought they were bound by the state constitution, and that if an appeal were to be made on federal grounds, it would have to go to federal court.

[sneakypete]

The Constitution does not guarantee you the right to own any weapon you want.

No,but it clearly guarantees the individual the RIGHT to own the weapons the common infantry soldier would be expected to have or use.