Kerry says he'll filibuster Supreme Court nominees who do not support abortion rights

Associated Press ^ | 06/20/2003 | NEDRA PICKLER

[The G Man]

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said Friday that he is prepared to block any Supreme Court nominee who would not uphold the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

"I am prepared to filibuster, if necessary, any Supreme Court nominee who would turn back the clock on a woman's right to choose or the constitutional right to privacy, on civil rights and individual liberties and on the laws protecting workers and the environment," Kerry said in remarks prepared for delivery via satellite at a meeting of Democratic party officials in St. Paul, Minn.

[The G Man]

Tsk, tsk ... doesn't Jacque Kerry know that litmus tests are a no-no?

[South40]

That's not true.

DimRATs never call it "Abortion rights".

They prefer to hide behind the false label of "A woman's right to choose".

[TLBSHOW]

Did Kerry say what I think he said?

Kerry only wants those that support murder as the Supreme Court nominees.

[Lady Eileen]

Yes.

[LandofLincoln]

Sorry that I posted the same thing. But, to assume that a person who is pro-life is pushing a personnal agenda, and a person who is pro-choice is interpreting the law, boarders on the idiotic.

[babyface00]

"push an extreme political agenda rather than to interpret the law "?!

Huh?

Maybe its just me, but finding "rights" that don't exist in the Constitution is pushing an extreme political agenda. Using those "rights" to expand the role of the federal government despite the clear wording of the Constitution ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people") and overruling the due process laws of a majority of the states is pushing an exreme agenda.

Whatever you think about "abortion rights", you have to admit that the Constitutional standing of Roe v Wade is shaky at best.

Dimwit Kerry is the one with the extreme political agenda. Thank God he's showing himself for what he is before the election.

[KellyAdmirer]

He is only managing to make his party look extreme and narrowly focused. Hope he comes up with some more litmus tests!

[Lady Eileen]

bump...Protect the Unborn.

[SunStar]

"The test is basic -- any person who thinks it's his or her job to push an extreme political agenda rather than to interpret the law should not be a Supreme Court justice."

Ruth Bader-Ginsburg MUST STEP DOWN!

[LandofLincoln]

Ann Coulter said it better ... "it is a woman's right to choose abortion."

She has no right to choose anything other than that, school vouchers being an example. My wife cannot choose to send our kids to a private school on the govy (our) dime.

Choice = abortion, nothing more.

[GoatWorship]

"The test is basic -- any person who thinks it's his or her job to push an extreme political agenda rather than to interpret the law should not be a Supreme Court justice."

There's a nice load of BS. Its not like he would filibuster a nominee who's extreme political agenda was pro-choice.

[Alberta's Child]

Dear Mr. Kerry:

If the U.S. Constitution is a "living document" that "grows" over time, then why is it so hard for you to accept the notion that what is an inalienable right today might be considered an abomination tomorrow?

Sincerely,

Alberta's Child

P.S. Mr. Kerry, you are one sorry jackass and don't have a chance in hell of being president.

[GoatWorship]

P.S. Mr. Kerry, you are one sorry jackass and don't have a chance in hell of being president.

I wish I had as much faith in that as you, my friend.

I simply cant place such high expectations on a public that elected Clinton twice, narrowly avoided electing Gore, and that doesn't even seem to widely grasp the benefit of paying the government a smaller quantity of their income.

[ConstitutionLover]

Isn't it the Democrats who always criticize the Republicans for trying to use litmus tests in appointing justices. Kerry sounds pretty hypocritical to me.

[Alberta's Child]

History tells us that U.S. senators rarely go on to successful White House bids.

And recent history tells us that former U.S. senators running for president are without a doubt among the dopiest human beings on the planet.

George McGovern . . . Walter Mondale . . . Bob Dole . . . Al Gore . . .

Soon we will be adding names like Joe Lieberman, John Kerry, John Edwards, Bob Graham, and Carol Moseley-Braun to that list.

[Pyro7480]

"The test is basic -- any person who thinks it's his or her job to push an extreme political agenda rather than to interpret the law should not be a Supreme Court justice."

Tell me about it! Where's the barf alert? And what is it with the leftist mindset that they're always accusing their opponents of what they themselves are blatantly guilty of?

[Loyal Buckeye]

Pro choice = Woman's right to choose = Pro death

[Lunatic Fringe]

"I am prepared to filibuster, if necessary, any Supreme Court nominee who would turn back the clock on a woman's right to choose or the constitutional right to privacy, on civil rights and individual liberties and on the laws protecting workers and the environment"

That is a LOT of litmus tests!

[GoatWorship]

History tells us that U.S. senators rarely go on to successful White House bids.

Well, that is certainly good news that helps to brighten the horizon a litle. Let's hope that pattern holds true!

[rwfromkansas]

I would endorse a candidate to lie about their abortion views if it would mean we could sneak someone past Kerry.

I am tired of them filibustering and it is time our nominees play dirty, including lying and pretending to be liberal if necessary.