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.

[RKV]

I stand corrected regarding the county supervisors and gun shows. My error. Re: my other comments, I stand my ground.

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

[lepton]

Nobody from California these days - nobody - can be trusted with such high responsibilities.

Where does Sowell live?

[lepton]

The most prominent question is how could she go along with the rest of the California wackos and rule that the right to keep and bear arms is not an individual right, but only a right granted to state militias?

9th Circuit (Circus) Court of Appeals...the Federal Court to which the California Supreme Court looks to for Federal matters.

[RKV]

I believe he works at the Hoover Institution at Stanford.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The Bill of Rights only partially applied to the states. The First amendment did NOT apply to the states. It clearly states "CONGRESS shall make no law ....."

[BaBaStooey]

we have a real winner here folks, sounds like a very smart, very eloquent lady who has all the right views on the issues for this crowd. best part yet, is that the dems can't do anything about it. Byrd will vote against her too, continuing his record of voting against every black supreme court nominee.

[RKV]

Please see my post #216 for Thomas Jefferson's take on the subject.

[Shooter 2.5]

Correct. She sided with the gunshows because the cities overstepped their bounds and she sided with the assault weapons ban because California doesn't have a Second Amendment in their constitution.

She sounds like a strict interpreter of the law.

If she was from a state that has a RKBA amendment in their constitution, she might have upheld it. Since she's from California, we don't know and that's why we're still debating.

[RKV]

Not so clear to me. It comes down to whether or not the federal constitution is supreme over the states (within its written limits).

[lepton]

The 10th Amendment was passed to clarify that if the power was not given to the Federal Government in the Constitution, that it did not have said power, and the power instead belonged either to the States, or to the people. It did not relegate the States to being an echo of the Federal Government.

Now...that being said, I think a fair interpretation of the 2nd Amendment in context with other powers granted the FedGov would be each that the FedGov is prohibitted from "abridging" the "right of the people to keep and bear arms", both individually, and in a militia, and that the States MUST NOT interfere with the ability of its citizens to properly train and maintain a milita available for the FedGov to "[call] forth [...] to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions".

[RKV]

I don't think too differently than you on this subject. Perhaps some difference in empahsis since I live in the PRK and am one of the citizens the state of Kalifornia is attempting to disarm (i.e. I own a semi-automatic firearm with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip).

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

Indeed am excellent endorsement.

[Shooter 2.5]

Until we get a Supreme Court ruling, states without a Second Amendment in their state constitutions are able to ban guns at will.

This is why a family man in New York was arrested and why my brother in law went to jail because he had a gun in his sock drawer.

[RKV]

Sorry to hear about your brother-in-law. I also desire a clear ruling from the Supremes on this subject (in favor of what I consider to be already the case - i.e. in matters where the US Constitution has spoken like RKBA, it is indeed supreme to state constitutions).

[Shooter 2.5]

The consensus is we would win by a vote of 5 to 4. That isn't good enough for me. I hope we can get at least 2 more Justices that support the Right to Keep and Bear Arms in the next six years.

P.S. If the police ever come to your door and ask your wife if you own any guns, instuct her to tell them to wait to ask you.

[ZULU]

If she isn't why the hack is Bush talking about her?? Will she wind up being another liberal sleeper like Souter??

If she really isn't pro-Second Amendment, the NRA should be getting on the horn to us to call Bush about this. This is a VERY important issue.

The entire Second Amendment issue may come to a head soon in the courts.

[RKV]

Good advice. I have told the same to my kids, too.

[Shooter 2.5]

We don't know that yet. She supported gunshows when it was in the relm of her ability but she supported the assault weapons bill because California doesn't have a Second Amendment.

The only difference is getting a candidate from a state that has a Second Amendment and find out whether the candidate supported it.

All I know so far is this person is a strict interpreter of the law.

[Shooter 2.5]

I completely forgot about the kids. Thank you.

I don't know if it would do any good in his case. The first thing his brats would ask is, "Is there a reward?" :)

[RKV]

That's why you take them to the range with you early on:)