SCOTUS Nomination Must-Reads

Click through for your Lauren-endorsed reads of the day.

Whirled View: John Roberts Blew It

I wouldn’t expect John G. Roberts or anyone else to remember buying a package of ripple potato chips for a Fourth of July picnic in 1987.

But not remembering what he did for the Federalist Society?

Playing with words when a damning document has been found?

We’re talking about the moral and intellectual caliber of a nominee to the highest court in the land. If he really has forgotten so many details about his association with the Federalist Society, he is suffering from some form of premature dementia, which surely disqualifies him for this position. If he’s compos mentis, he is lying.

Sorry, weaseling.

John Roberts has a nice smile, but snake oil sells better when the hawker’s got charm. Let’s not buy it.

Liberal Avenger: Conflict of Faith

…Roberts’ statement [that he would recuse himself from any case that required a judgement the church would consider immoral] truly was extraordinary. Basically, it means that he would recuse himself whenever the dictates of the law conflict with those of the Vatican. Which means he could potentially be unable to rule upon any case involving abortion, capital punishment, birth control, homosexuality, and probably a host of other issues. Which means one has to question his appropriateness as a Supreme Court Justice.

Kathryn Cramer: Well, Ladies, Let’s Get To It

Overturning Roe v. Wade is the Koolaid the Bush cult is determined to drink. Trying will get them far politically. I think succeeding would have very negative repercussions for them. (If the fetal prognosis is bad enough for a pregnancy in the immediate family, nearly everyone becomes pro-choice.)

One doesn’t have to read tea-leaves to recognize that Bush is going to expect of his nominee that he vote to overturn Roe v. Wade given the opportunity.

To Be Determined: Have You Read the Constitution Lately?

I will feel like Don Quixote swinging at a bunch of goddamn wind mills if I am so naive as to go about proclaiming to be a proponent for the rights of oppressed minorities, when I myself ignore the question as to whether or not someone is at least for upholding the basic rights we have been explicitly afforded for hundreds of years (almost nearly) without question. The laws that have been passed under the watch of this administration (and Bill Clinton, Mr. Defense of Marriage Act Signer Himself, which clearly defies Article IV, Section 1) are abhorrent. The terrorists or Muslims or Faggots or Whoever You Want To Scapegoat As Destroying Our Country needn’t really do their job all that well, because we’re blindly taking it apart from the inside. I want someone critical to go into this slot on the SCOTUS. I demand someone who — corporate welfare, human rights, whatever, aside — learns how to read and uphold the spirit of the Constitution, and I truly believe if they do that, everyone, everywhere, will be better off.

Pesky Apostrophe: Liaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar!

In case you’re wondering why membership in the Federalist Society might be a negative, check this out. It would be equivalent of Bill Clinton nominating someone to the Supreme Court who was an active member of MoveOn, you know, someone who helped direct their activities. And you can’t tell me conservatives wouldn’t be completely freaked out about that.

Fafblog!: Nomination: The Alternates!

GOD! Since all our rights come from God, why not just appoint God to the Supreme Court in the first place? God can never make a wrong decision – he’s omniscient! This should make his opinions a lot shorter an easier to read on accounta each of em’ll just say “Because I said so.” The God Court might get pretty controversial when God starts handin down the decisions – mandatory school prayer, abortion, mandatory home prayer, stoning, mandatory plagues during the census, Adam and Eve v. Adam and Steve – and he might not turn out to be the most easygoin judge. It’ll be hard to keep him from readin dissents in the form of a whirlwind or a pillar a fire or smitin Souter from the bench. But nobody can say he’s not qualified!


Similar Posts (automatically generated):

4 comments for “SCOTUS Nomination Must-Reads

  1. July 26, 2005 at 1:45 pm

    Oh no! Is Dubya’s PA infected?

  2. July 26, 2005 at 1:57 pm

    Apparently so, but since Bush has been so bad about educating about infectious disease, I predict no one will notice the infection until too late.

  3. July 26, 2005 at 7:10 pm

    It’s probably already gotten to his brain, what with all the swerving about and bicycle accidents he’s had of late.

  4. pls
    July 30, 2005 at 10:27 pm

    Lauren: Thanks for calling attention to my piece. Unfortunately it’s got worse and worse since I wrote about John Roberts blowing it. As additional documents turn up, he seems more and more like an ideologue who would undo several generations worth of civil rights and social justice decisions–and who would defer to presidential power even more than the current court does. This is why I get quite angry when people say that voting isn’t worth the effort. The country is actually nearly evenly divided and very few votes, in 2004, gave us George W. Bush determing or strongly influencing who will dominate the Supreme Court for the next few decades.

Comments are closed.