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

Skip to comments.

Antonin Scalia Defends Miers
Newsmax ^ | 10/9/5

Posted on 10/09/2005 9:10:09 AM PDT by Crackingham

In an interview set for broadcast on Monday, leading conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia appears to be defending Harriet Miers against critics who say she doesn't have the qualifications to sit on the High Court.

"I think it's a good thing to have people from all sorts of backgrounds [on the Court]," Scalia tells CNBC's Maria Bartiromo, as the debate rages over Miers' lack of judical experience.

Without mentioning the Bush nominee by name, the conservative legal icon said that the High Court needed someone who had never served as a judge to take the place of the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

"There is now nobody with that [non judicial] background after the death of the previous chief," Scalia laments to Bartiromo.

"And the reason that's happened, I think, is that the nomination and confirmation process has become so controversial, so politicized that I think a president does not want to give the opposition an easy excuse [to say] 'Well, this person has no judicial experience.'" Scalia concludes: "I don't think that's a good thing. I think the Byron Whites, the Lewis Powells and the Bill Rehnquists have contributed to the court even though they didn't sit on a lower federal court."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: antoninscalia; endorsement; harrietmiers; miers; scalia; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 501-532 next last

1 posted on 10/09/2005 9:10:12 AM PDT by Crackingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
This can't be good. We all that Bush's lawyer is a closet feminist, Marxist, and liberal.

/snicker

2 posted on 10/09/2005 9:11:43 AM PDT by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Well, well......the HERO to all of us conservatives DOES NOT think Meirs to be a catostrophic nomination!!!

I guess everyone here who has given up on BUSH will just have to give up on Scalia.

After all he is NOT really a conservative in the mold of Thomas, now is he?

3 posted on 10/09/2005 9:13:13 AM PDT by PISANO (We will not tire......We will not falter.......We will NOT FAIL!!! .........GW Bush [Oct 2001])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PISANO

he is not commenting on her specific abilities - either way. its just a general comment.


4 posted on 10/09/2005 9:14:18 AM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Confusing story.

For example....

"Without mentioning the Bush nominee by name, the conservative legal icon (Scalia) said that the High Court needed someone who had never served as a judge to take the place of the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist."

Scalia is therefore talking about John Roberts and defending his position as CJ on the SC -- not Harriet Miers. This appears to be a take on Roberts, not Miers.

5 posted on 10/09/2005 9:14:25 AM PDT by jdm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

BUMP to watch the meltdown if the screamers are up this morning...


6 posted on 10/09/2005 9:14:57 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Just confirm Miers so that FR can have a REAL meltdown. Yes I have popcorn ready.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

There is no way this woman is not qualified. What they teach you in law school, essentially, is what an appellate judge does. You read hundreds of cases, and discuss what they mean and the logic behind them.

So every graduate of law school really has the training to be an appellate judge, although possibly not the temperament. And it's really not something that you get better at with experience. In fact, if anything it's the opposite. The longer you sit on the bench, the more you come to think that it's your opinion that's important, and not the legislature's.


7 posted on 10/09/2005 9:16:11 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

Although Scalia didn't comment on HM's specific abilities, either way, for him to comment at all, even in a general way is a lion's roar.


8 posted on 10/09/2005 9:17:17 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jdm

Yes, leave it to Newsmax to screw up something like this, perhaps on purpose.


9 posted on 10/09/2005 9:17:56 AM PDT by neutrality
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
BUMP to watch the meltdown if the screamers are up this morning...

God, I hope they've all got laryngitis by now. I'm sick of them and their negative drumbeats.

10 posted on 10/09/2005 9:18:34 AM PDT by demkicker (Life has many choices. Eternity has only two. Which one have you chosen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
Bull's-eye!
11 posted on 10/09/2005 9:19:18 AM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

It looks like all the grumblers over Miers will have a new voice to contend with, a voice that's the icon of conservatism. What will Ann Coulter do now? Yikes!


12 posted on 10/09/2005 9:19:43 AM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdm

Sorry but Roberts was a judge.


13 posted on 10/09/2005 9:19:52 AM PDT by csmusaret (Urban Sprawl is an oxymoron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
A pitbull in size 6 shoes packing heat

My kinda judge!!

14 posted on 10/09/2005 9:19:54 AM PDT by KosmicKitty (Not too worry - we'll all be united again under the next Clinton presidency!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
Scalia must know something good for him to have said these positive comments.

Excellent

15 posted on 10/09/2005 9:20:25 AM PDT by Battle Hymn of the Republic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Finally! A reasoned voice speaks.


16 posted on 10/09/2005 9:20:40 AM PDT by Virginia Queen (Virginia Queen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neutrality
NEWSMAX: America's News Source:

Ya know, if you're not really hung up on that whole "accurate and reliable information" kick

17 posted on 10/09/2005 9:20:55 AM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: hershey
"Although Scalia didn't comment on HM's specific abilities, either way, for him to comment at all, even in a general way is a lion's roar."

I see zero comment from Scalia on Miers, in this article. He's talking about John Roberts; not Miers. He's referring to the person replacing Rehnquist. Miers isn't replacing Rehnquist; she's replacing O'Connor.
18 posted on 10/09/2005 9:20:55 AM PDT by jdm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Do not dub me shapka broham; flashbunny; Map Kernow

Isnt this hilarious? The same people that want to discount EVERYONE else (ie the pundits like Limbaugh, Levin, etc) --because "BUSH KNOWS HER", are the same people who run right over here and cheer on Scalia, who DOESNT. So which is it?

LOL!!


19 posted on 10/09/2005 9:21:45 AM PDT by Stellar Dendrite ( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: demkicker

maybe maybe not...

but I just popped from fresh popcorn and after my Buckeyes took a dive last night, I need some good laughs....


20 posted on 10/09/2005 9:22:13 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Just confirm Miers so that FR can have a REAL meltdown. Yes I have popcorn ready.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: conservativepoet

"Scalia concludes: I think the Byron Whites, the Lewis Powells and the Bill Rehnquists have contributed to the court even though they didn't sit on a lower federal court."

Sounds like it was meant for Miers.


21 posted on 10/09/2005 9:22:36 AM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neutrality
"Yes, leave it to Newsmax to screw up something like this, perhaps on purpose."

No one is getting it. Scalia says NOTHING about Miers in this article. Nothing.
22 posted on 10/09/2005 9:22:55 AM PDT by jdm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

This is the first thing I have heard that makes me feel a bit better about Miers. I have the greatest respect for Scalia. If she's ok with him, that means a lot.


23 posted on 10/09/2005 9:23:07 AM PDT by Pharmboy (Democrats lie because they have to.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservativepoet
"What will Ann Coulter do now? Yikes!"


I hope she gives serious thought to going into rehab and chilling out. She has become too full of herself in the extreme and, thus, begun to look ridiculous.
24 posted on 10/09/2005 9:24:41 AM PDT by Virginia Queen (Virginia Queen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

I'll roast a couple marshmallows for ya re: screamers. :-)

Scalia shoots straight,imo.

Let the process play out.


25 posted on 10/09/2005 9:24:59 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

If we wanted his opinion, we'd ask the pundits.


26 posted on 10/09/2005 9:25:53 AM PDT by unsycophant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Waiting for the Meirs' bashers to call Scalia a RINO/neo-con/Bush crony.


27 posted on 10/09/2005 9:26:19 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Harmful or Fatal if Swallowed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

"Isnt this hilarious? The same people that want to discount EVERYONE else (ie the pundits like Limbaugh, Levin, etc) --because "BUSH KNOWS HER", are the same people who run right over here and cheer on Scalia, who DOESNT. So which is it?"


He's responding to the critic's argument. He's suggesting their argument (lack of judicial experience) doesn't hold water.


28 posted on 10/09/2005 9:26:20 AM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite
Yes, it is.

It should be noted that I stated-before that article was posted-that Scalia wouldn't come out in opposition to this candidate.

In fact, my respect for him would be diminished if he had.

Also, he did not defend Harriet Miers, he defended-in a generic sense-the concept of a non-jurist being elevated to the Supreme Court.

29 posted on 10/09/2005 9:26:23 AM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: jdm
Bush Bot:

LA-LA-LA! I'M NOT LISTENING!!!!

(Sticks fingers in ears.)

30 posted on 10/09/2005 9:28:05 AM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy

I think what he's saying is accurate, but it doesn't necessarily reflect on Miers. As a general statement, he's right--people criticizing Miers for her lack of judicial experience are off-base. This doesn't mean that she's a good pick, otherwise.


31 posted on 10/09/2005 9:28:22 AM PDT by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jdm
... the conservative legal icon said that the High Court needed someone who had never served as a judge to take the place of the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

I think he's talking about Miers. His comparison is on judge vs. non judge, not CJ Rehnquist vs CJ Roberts or Rehnquist-replacement vs O'Conno-replacement.

32 posted on 10/09/2005 9:29:10 AM PDT by paudio (Four More Years..... Let's Use Them Wisely...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham
"I think the Byron Whites, the Lewis Powells and the Bill Rehnquists have contributed to the court even though they didn't sit on a lower federal court."

Miers is not of this caliber. Not even close.

33 posted on 10/09/2005 9:29:16 AM PDT by JCEccles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
God, I hope they've all got laryngitis by now. I'm sick of them and their negative drumbeats.

The people who oppose Meirs are simply liberal/conservative elitist snobs.

"Waaaa she didn't attend Hahvard and she won't be attending our cocktail parties. Part of the little people, I say. Haarumph."

34 posted on 10/09/2005 9:29:32 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Harmful or Fatal if Swallowed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge; MikeinIraq
How long before someone calls for Scalia's impeachment for this overt act of moral turpitude?
35 posted on 10/09/2005 9:29:33 AM PDT by verity (Don't let your children grow up to be mainstream media maggots.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jdm

You are looking for justification where none exists - Rhenquist himself was a Justice before he was Chief, however before being nominated to SCOTUS he had no previous judicial experience. The reference of Byron White and Lewis Powell clearly shows Sclaia's mindset - Rhenquist, White, and Powell all came to SCOTUS without having sat on the bench.

Roberts was in fact a lower court Judge before his nomination to SCOTUS - he doesn't fit this discussion (not to mention he is now the sitting CJ and Scalia is not likely to discuss the qualification of a sitting justice out of simple decorum.)

Know the facts, and it all becomes quite clear. Scalia's reference is to a nominee without previous judicial experience - HM. You can try to spin this to make yourself feel better about the situation, but it won't make it any less true.


36 posted on 10/09/2005 9:29:59 AM PDT by BlueNgold (Feed the Tree .....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Do not dub me shapka broham
Bush Bot? I think Harriet Miers was an absolutely terrible choice for the SC.
37 posted on 10/09/2005 9:30:44 AM PDT by jdm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Sorry about your Buckeyes. My Longhorns and Red Raiders won yesterday and so did my Astros! Three for three is unusual...

I'm about to sign off FR for a while & get some stuff done. The Astros can clinch with a win over Atlanta at noon today here in Houston and I'll be parked in front of the tube. Your popcorn sounds good! Hope I didn't blow all my good fortune yesterday...


38 posted on 10/09/2005 9:31:31 AM PDT by demkicker (Life has many choices. Eternity has only two. Which one have you chosen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: hershey

does Scalia know Miers at all? where would Scalia have gotten any in depth knowledge of Miers from?


39 posted on 10/09/2005 9:31:41 AM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DTogo

ping to #19


40 posted on 10/09/2005 9:31:45 AM PDT by Stellar Dendrite ( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Strange Question: Is there any law against conferring with sitting conservative judges regarding nominations?


41 posted on 10/09/2005 9:31:55 AM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: verity; NormsRevenge

Either that or the Scalia doesn't know what he is talking about and blahhhhhh....

popcorn GOOD!!


42 posted on 10/09/2005 9:32:03 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (Just confirm Miers so that FR can have a REAL meltdown. Yes I have popcorn ready.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

You seriously think he would say anything negative about her if he thought he was going to have to work with her for the rest of his time on the bench?


43 posted on 10/09/2005 9:32:25 AM PDT by jdhljc169
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdm
Scalia is therefore talking about John Roberts and defending his position as CJ on the SC -- not Harriet Miers. This appears to be a take on Roberts, not Miers.

Uh, excuse me, but Judge Roberts came from the Court of Appeals. It is definitely not him whom Scalia was referring to.

44 posted on 10/09/2005 9:32:32 AM PDT by ContraryMary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: verity; MikeinIraq

at least he didn't say we needed to look for judicial talent offshore.. like some justices might.. ;-)


45 posted on 10/09/2005 9:33:38 AM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: paudio
Fair enough. But why wouldn't the sentence, then, instead, read:

"... the conservative legal icon said that the High Court needed someone who had never served as a judge to take the place of the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Sandra Day O'Connor."

That would be more accurate, IMO. After all, Miers is not going to be Chief Justice, as was Rehnquist.

46 posted on 10/09/2005 9:33:47 AM PDT by jdm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Battle Hymn of the Republic

Why does everybody think that others (Reid, Bork, Scalia) have some bit of secret information? The only one who might is the president.


47 posted on 10/09/2005 9:34:34 AM PDT by AmishDude (Proud inventor of the term "Patsies". Please make out all royalty checks to "AmishDude".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jdm
It's called sarcasm.
48 posted on 10/09/2005 9:34:35 AM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Reactionary
Scalia concludes: "I don't think that's a good thing. I think the Byron Whites, the Lewis Powells and the Bill Rehnquists have contributed to the court even though they didn't sit on a lower federal court

What does he know, he's not a self appointed Conservative god!!

Pray for W and Harriet Miers

49 posted on 10/09/2005 9:35:16 AM PDT by bray (Islam IS a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jdm

Curiously, I can't find another source for these quotes. They somehow sound familiar, however.


50 posted on 10/09/2005 9:36:08 AM PDT by neutrality
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 501-532 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