Thursday, January 06, 2005
Justice, schmustice...
Disturbing news (isn’t it ALWAYS?) on the judicial nominee front. With his upcoming coronation ahead of him, Bush feels pretty comfortable giving Democrats the finger by resubmitting a bunch of justices that weren’t confirmed last year. Check ‘em out!
It’s hard to say which of these is the worst. Janice Brown is pretty freaking frightening. She’s described as being to the RIGHT of Antonin Scalia. I didn’t know there was anything further right!
From the People For the American Way website:
“When Brown was nominated to the state supreme court in 1996, she was found unqualified by the state bar evaluation committee, based not only on her relative inexperience but also because she was "prone to inserting conservative political views into her appellate opinions" and based on complaints that she was "insensitive to established precedent."
“As a state supreme court justice, Brown has issued only one opinion dealing with abortion, but it raises serious concerns about her judicial philosophy concerning women’s constitutional right to privacy and reproductive freedom. In her dissent, Brown argued that the federal Constitution somehow restricts the privacy protections that may be provided by the state constitution, a position far outside the mainstream of judicial thought. She argued that the court majority’s decision ruling unconstitutional a restrictive parental consent law for minors seeking abortions would allow courts to “topple every cultural icon, to dismiss all societal values, and to become final arbiters of traditional morality.”
It’s hard to say which of these is the worst. Janice Brown is pretty freaking frightening. She’s described as being to the RIGHT of Antonin Scalia. I didn’t know there was anything further right!
From the People For the American Way website:
“When Brown was nominated to the state supreme court in 1996, she was found unqualified by the state bar evaluation committee, based not only on her relative inexperience but also because she was "prone to inserting conservative political views into her appellate opinions" and based on complaints that she was "insensitive to established precedent."
“As a state supreme court justice, Brown has issued only one opinion dealing with abortion, but it raises serious concerns about her judicial philosophy concerning women’s constitutional right to privacy and reproductive freedom. In her dissent, Brown argued that the federal Constitution somehow restricts the privacy protections that may be provided by the state constitution, a position far outside the mainstream of judicial thought. She argued that the court majority’s decision ruling unconstitutional a restrictive parental consent law for minors seeking abortions would allow courts to “topple every cultural icon, to dismiss all societal values, and to become final arbiters of traditional morality.”
