Posted on 10/27/2005 7:43:50 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Some Possible Supreme Court Nominees
By The Associated Press 20 minutes ago
Some of the possible candidates for President Bush to choose after the withdrawal of Harriet Miers' nomination:
_SAMUEL A. ALITO, 55: A strong conservative voice in his 15 years on the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is considered to be among the most liberal. He has been dubbed "Scalito" or "Scalia-lite" by some lawyers because his judicial philosophy invites comparisons to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
_EMILIO GARZA, 58: Sits on the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and was considered for a Supreme Court seat by the first President Bush. He has become best known for his views that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and that abortion regulation should be decided by state legislatures.
_ALBERTO GONZALES, 50: U.S. attorney general and former White House counsel. Critics contend a memo he wrote on treatment of terrorism detainees helped lead to abuses like those seen at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Conservatives have urged Bush not to nominate him.
_EDITH HOLLAN JONES, 55: Has served on the 5th Circuit since 1985. The first President Bush considered Jones for a vacancy on the Supreme Court in 1990, but nominated David H. Souter.
_J. MICHAEL LUTTIG, 51: Worked in the Justice Department during the administration of the first President Bush and has served on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va. He was a law clerk to the late Chief Justice Warren Burger from 1983-84.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Bush should nominate Pissant. I'll make Scalia look like a SF liberal.
"The first President Bush considered Jones for a vacancy on the Supreme Court in 1990, but nominated David H. Souter."
Thanks alot '41.
Any listed other than Gonzales.
All great candidates but all will be portrayed as right-wing ideologues, borked and probably filibustered by the left. The Rinos in the Senate will do nothing to push any of those candidates through the confirmation process and the nominee will fail.
Hope the Miers bashers are pleased with what they've sown.
After Miers, however, I wouldn't hazard a guess where the next nominee will come from.
Where government advances – and it advances relentlessly – freedom is imperiled; community impoverished; religion marginalized and civilization itself jeopardized....When did government cease to be a necessary evil and become a goody bag to solve our private problems?
--Judge Janice Rogers Brown
Nice idea, but now that the conservatives have shot down Edith Miers with the argument that the Senate has a responsibility to shoot down anyone that they disagree with....
The Democrats, aligned with the John (the traitor )McCain band have been authorized to shoot down ANY conservative with the following argument. "The president can nominate, but it is the responsibility of the senate to approve or disapprove, regardless of qualification". A majority of senators are not conservative and the left-leaning Republicans have been granted a free license to shoot down any conservative judge.
Ditto
"EDITH HOLLAN JONES, 55: Has served on the 5th Circuit since 1985. The first President Bush considered Jones for a vacancy on the Supreme Court in 1990, but nominated David H. Souter"
Good heavens! Jones is only 55? And to think that she could have been tormenting the left for 15 years and still have another 25 to go....WOW.
Well...it's not too late!!!
It's going to be Janice Rogers Brown.
This is who conservatives wanted to begin with.
I'm telling you, this was the plan all along.
Give the conservative base a chance to show they will oppose the President on an issue.
And now, Republicans will rally around a true conservative.
And she's a she and black.
It all makes sense.
The compromise candidate: Orrin Hatch. ;)
Double sourced dittos.
I'm betting Maura Corrigan or Alice Batchelder.
What are you going to do when it isn't her? It isn't going to be JRB.
The Democrats have already been making that argument against any nominee that threatens their use of the Court as the means to pursue a political agenda they could not achieve legitimately...and they will do so again.
what if? what if? you don't think some of them already ARE!?
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.