Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DeLay Slams Supreme Court Justice
Associated Press ^ | 4-19-2005 | JESSE J. HOLLAND

Posted on 04/19/2005 8:37:21 PM PDT by kingattax

WASHINGTON (AP) - House Majority Leader Tom DeLay intensified his criticism of the federal courts on Tuesday, singling out Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's work from the bench as "incredibly outrageous" because he has relied on international law and done research on the Internet.

DeLay said he thought there were a "lot of Republican-appointed judges that are judicial activists."

The No. 2 Republican in the House has openly criticized the federal courts since they refused to order the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. And he pointed to Kennedy as an example of Republican members of the Supreme Court who were activist and isolated.

"Absolutely. We've got Justice Kennedy writing decisions based upon international law, not the Constitution of the United States? That's just outrageous," DeLay told Fox News Radio. "And not only that, but he said in session that he does his own research on the Internet? That is just incredibly outrageous."

A spokeswoman for the court, Kathy Arberg, said Kennedy could not be reached for comment.

Although Kennedy was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Reagan, a conservative icon, he has aroused conservatives' ire by sometimes agreeing with the court's more liberal members. Nevertheless, it is unusual for a congressional leader to single out a Supreme Court justice for criticism.

Dan Allen, a DeLay spokesman, declined comment on the interview.

DeLay himself has been criticized for his comments following Schiavo's death, which came despite Congress' passage of a law giving the federal courts jurisdiction to review her case. They declined to intervene.

"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior," DeLay said in a statement.

He apologized last week, saying he had spoken in an "inartful" way.

Conservatives have been pushing to get the Senate to confirm President Bush's most conservative judicial nominees, which Senate Democrats are blocking. The House has no power over which judges are given lifetime appointments to the federal bench.

However, DeLay has called repeatedly for the House to find a way to hold the federal judiciary accountable for its decisions. "The judiciary has become so activist and so isolated from the American people that it's our job to do that," DeLay said.

One way would be for the House Judiciary Committee to investigate the clause in the Constitution that says "judges can serve as long as they serve with good behavior," he said. "We want to define what good behavior means. And that's where you have to start."


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: anthonykennedy; delay; judiciary; supremecourt; transjudicialism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-129 next last
To: Milhous

We'll see. Like I said, hope you're right...


101 posted on 04/20/2005 8:02:20 AM PDT by general_re ("Frantic orthodoxy is never rooted in faith, but in doubt." - Reinhold Niebuhr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: IleeneWright

Post #2 for Delay info.


102 posted on 04/20/2005 8:05:13 AM PDT by Fam4Bush (More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of..........A.L. Tennyson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Tom DeLay Rocks!!!!


103 posted on 04/20/2005 8:07:13 AM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Thanks for Posting. I'm proud of Delay.

I hope he continues to stand firm.


104 posted on 04/20/2005 8:31:32 AM PDT by FR_addict
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FR_addict

i have great respect for Cong. DeLay. please see # 2.

we all need to write him an email of support.


105 posted on 04/20/2005 8:36:32 AM PDT by kingattax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: atlaw

Gore vs Bush comes to mind as an important one.


106 posted on 04/20/2005 8:49:41 AM PDT by BamaAndy (democrats are base, stupid people without a clue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: BamaAndy

Why? Because you disagree with the dissenting opinions? (Which, by the way, argued in effect that the majority decision was an impermissible over-extension of the Supreme Court's jurisdiction and improper judicial activism, both of which are the principal complaints lodged against the Court by many posters here.)


107 posted on 04/20/2005 9:54:02 AM PDT by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: falpro
Trying to sincerely understand why he makes you nervous.

He makes my skin crawl when I listen to him. He comes across as wound up so tight, and so angry, that I sometimes wonder if he might go postal. I think he frightens swing voters, and sends them running to the exits. And he does not mitigate that by articulating or selling well his policy positions. In fact, he hardly bothers. His speech on the Schiavo legislation was a case in point. He just said, the Schindlers want to take care of their daughter who is dying. Let's call the vote.

I think the DeLay issue might cost the GOP a half dozen seats in the House or more, all by himself, if matters remain as they are now. Actually, there is a fair chance that DeLay will lose is own seat, if a credible and well financed Dem runs against him. He won only 55% last time against an unfunded nobody, which was a rather anemic performance for the district.

108 posted on 04/20/2005 11:19:05 AM PDT by Torie (Constrain rogue state courts; repeal your state constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
please drop him an email and let him know you support him

see # 2 .......thanks

Thank you! I was wanting to send him an e-mail to thank him and to give him encouragement, but I didn't have his addy. Now I do, so I'm sending one out today.

109 posted on 04/20/2005 12:23:09 PM PDT by NRA2BFree (Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge ..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: NRA2BFree

thats great...youre welcome


110 posted on 04/20/2005 12:26:41 PM PDT by kingattax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: atlaw

But, one might ask how reliable these sites are. They know the tons of law books on their shelves can be counted on to have been proofread with a fine tooth comb -- the publisher's reputation rests on it. Nobody's attesting to the accuracy of what you can Google up.


111 posted on 04/20/2005 11:17:38 PM PDT by The Red Zone (Florida, the sun-shame state and Georgia, the rotten peach, and Illinois the chicken injun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: atlaw

No, not at all--because it shows their political stripe is more important than law. The case went to the federal guidelines of voting and whether it was correct to re-count only certain counties (democrat) and on the face of it, it is only pandering to the left, not substantiated by law. These judges consistently err on the side of the left and only in rare instances do they agree with strict construction. Whether the issue is parental notification, privacy, private ownership, criminal law, police procedures, jerrymandering, I have an opinion on where they go based on their socialist lite, sometimes heavy decisions.


112 posted on 04/21/2005 1:05:36 AM PDT by BamaAndy (democrats are base, stupid people without a clue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

He could take Kay Bailey's place. Then Texas would have Cornyn and DeLay - WOW!


113 posted on 04/21/2005 1:09:15 AM PDT by mathluv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: BamaAndy

Well, I agree that Souter and Ginsberg have a decidedly liberal slant in their decisions. But the majority decision in Bush v. Gore had nothing to do with "strict construction," and was an extraordinary act of judicial activism (although the kind of activism that we, as conservatives, apparently approve of).

There is no more telling evidence of just how activist the decision was than the mandate language that it is not to be considered precedential for any purpose.


114 posted on 04/21/2005 3:13:25 AM PDT by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Kryptonite

Well, Lexis and Westlaw are on the Internet.


Yep and vulnerable like everything else on the Internet!

A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE? Would YOU want YOUR loved one's LIFE, to be LITERALLY subject to the SUPREME COURT deciding on info from the Internet and INTERNATIONAL LAW, as oppose to AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW?

NOT ME!


115 posted on 04/21/2005 5:06:18 AM PDT by IleeneWright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
"And not only that, but he said in session that he does his own research on the Internet? That is just incredibly outrageous."

WTF??

116 posted on 04/21/2005 5:14:27 AM PDT by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kryptonite
Well, Lexis and Westlaw are on the Internet.

Yes, and this is probably what Kennedy meant when he said he does research on the internet. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that either. Few judges even touch law books any more - it's simply too cumbersome and expensive to keep a full set of all of the cases that you need.
117 posted on 04/21/2005 5:17:11 AM PDT by July 4th (A vacant lot cancelled out my vote for Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
In addition to Westlaw and Lexis, there is an enormous amount of legal research that can be done through the internet.... Rep. Delay's shock at a Justice doing his own research on the internet is just bizarre.

I have no idea what he's even trying to say, unless it's a cynical play to the clueless peanut gallery crowd who think that "The Internet" is all about porn and bootlegging.

It's as if you accused Justice Kennedy of "doing his research by reading" to an audience that doesn't understand the difference between Blackstone and the authors of the Weekly World News.

118 posted on 04/21/2005 5:19:34 AM PDT by steve-b (A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
Oh honestly. The databases on the internet that I am referring to are maintained by the respective courts, governmental agencies, arbitration bodies, law schools, bar associations, etc., and many are designed purposefully for professional use and are consequently accessible only on a fee or password basis. Indeed, it has become somewhat of a habit for appellate courts to publish opinions in electronic form and only on a discretionary basis publish those opinions in bound form.

Are you suggesting that the data bases maintained by biologists, physicists, mathematicians, engineers, oil and gas e&p companies, economic think tanks, etc. cannot be relied upon by the professionals in those fields?

Even the casual user can distinguish between a legitimate database and World Net Daily (as I hope you can), and a Supreme Court Justice isn't exactly a casual user.

119 posted on 04/21/2005 6:23:47 AM PDT by atlaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: atlaw

Are you suggesting that the data bases maintained by biologists, physicists, mathematicians, engineers, oil and gas e&p companies, economic think tanks, etc. cannot be relied upon by the professionals in those fields?

Even the casual user can distinguish between a legitimate database and World Net Daily (as I hope you can), and a Supreme Court Justice isn't exactly a casual user.


ummm.....HELLO? A computerized database, is not the SAME as the INTERNET! One does not need to access the Internet, to access one's DATABASE!

That is DIFFERENT! But that isn't what Kennedy utilized! Oh and why the avoidance in his use of seeking INTERNATIONAL LAW to support his CRIME?


120 posted on 04/21/2005 7:13:22 AM PDT by IleeneWright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-129 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson