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

Skip to comments.

Giuliani: Abortion not a test for judges
AP ^ | July 18, 2007 | By LIBBY QUAID

Posted on 07/18/2007 2:36:05 PM PDT by Rick_Michael

COUNCIL BLUFFS, Iowa - Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, a proponent of abortion rights, said Wednesday he would not use a judicial nominee's stand on the issue or the landmark Supreme Court decision as a litmus test...............

"Abortion is not a litmus test. Roe v. Wade is not a litmus test. No particular case is a litmus test. That's not the way to appoint Supreme Court justices or any judge," Giuliani said.

Roe v. Wade is the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that established a constitutional right to abortion. Giuliani favors abortion rights though he has said he personally opposes the procedure, a stand that puts him at odds with his rivals and the conservative Republicans who hold sway in the primaries............

"It would be OK," Giuliani said. "It would be OK to repeal it."

But, he added: "It would be OK also if a strict constructionist viewed it as precedent" and kept the law intact...................


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2008; abortion; giuliani; giulianitruthfile; rudy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 07/18/2007 2:36:08 PM PDT by Rick_Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael

It CAN’T be OK to have it either way! What a lying loser!


2 posted on 07/18/2007 2:43:43 PM PDT by 2harddrive (...House a TOTAL Loss.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael

Go away, you gun grabber, you. Just wait til Fred kicks your little heiny.


3 posted on 07/18/2007 2:43:54 PM PDT by AlaskaErik (Run, Fred run! I will send my donation as soon as you announce.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael
It would be OK," Giuliani said. "It would be OK to repeal it."

But, he added: "It would be OK also if a strict constructionist viewed it as precedent" and kept the law intact...................

Rudy, you better hope that fence you're straddling doesn't get too high.

4 posted on 07/18/2007 2:44:28 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (May the heirs of Charles Martel and Jan Sobieski rise up again to defend Europe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael
Compare this to Duncan Hunter:

"If a judicial nominee can look at a sonogram, the picture of an unborn child, and not see, looking at that sonogram, not see a valuable human life, I'm not going to give him an appointment to the court," said Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. "I am going to give him an appointment to an optometrist to get a set of eyeglasses so that he can see that."

5 posted on 07/18/2007 2:44:58 PM PDT by pissant (Duncan Hunter: Warrior, Statesman, Conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael

Keep on getting that message out. There are still people planning to vote for you Rudy.


6 posted on 07/18/2007 2:45:08 PM PDT by Ingtar (The LDS problem that Romney is facing is not his religion, but his Lacking Decisive Stands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Great quote. Wish Mr. Hunter was higher on that poll on the right side of the FR screen...


7 posted on 07/18/2007 2:48:40 PM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: madison10

Considering he’s running about 40% against the great white hope, I’m optimistic.


8 posted on 07/18/2007 2:51:50 PM PDT by pissant (Duncan Hunter: Warrior, Statesman, Conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael

Obviously Rudy Guilanai doesn’t know what it means to be a “strict constructionist jurist”, sorry Guliani; You fail!


9 posted on 07/18/2007 2:57:03 PM PDT by JSDude1 (Republicans if the don't beware ARE the new WHIGS! (all empty hairpieces..) :).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

I have been reading your posts - you appear to a reasoned individual. You make measured posts, and you manage to stay “inside the ropes”.


10 posted on 07/18/2007 2:59:40 PM PDT by Juliets Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael
I agree with Rudy.

The only philosophical consideration for a USSC Justice should be a literal interpretation of the Constitution...otherwise known as Strict Construction.

It would be an ENORMOUS step forward for the court and the country.

11 posted on 07/18/2007 2:59:44 PM PDT by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael

Someone put the name JulieAnnie in a post recently and now I can’t think of Rudy without thinking of that name.


12 posted on 07/18/2007 3:02:54 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael
Gee didn’t know that there was a new definition of “strict constructionist” who would think that penumbrae were in the Constitution!
13 posted on 07/18/2007 3:03:07 PM PDT by keepitreal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael

Would support or opposition to human slavery also NOT be a test for judges that you would appoint, Rudy? Idiot...


14 posted on 07/18/2007 3:04:27 PM PDT by Spiff (Rudy Giuliani Quote (NY Post, 1996) "Most of Clinton's policies are very similar to most of mine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Juliets Dad; pissant

...of course, he doesn’t know you as well as the rest of us.


15 posted on 07/18/2007 3:05:54 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael
he would not use a judicial nominee's stand on the issue or the landmark Supreme Court decision as a litmus test...............

A euphemism that means that he (and anyone else who utters that phrase) will nominate pro-abortion judges. Any sort of "moderation" on an issue like abortion is pure hypocrisy. If it is murder, than what makes it all right "under certain conditions" and if it isn't why regulate it at all?

16 posted on 07/18/2007 3:05:55 PM PDT by SeƱor Zorro ("The ability to speak does not make you intelligent"--Qui-Gon Jinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

“Strict Construction.”
‘cept Ghoulinai thinks that abortion is in the Constitution.


17 posted on 07/18/2007 3:07:09 PM PDT by dynachrome (Henry Bowman is right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Rick_Michael

18 posted on 07/18/2007 3:11:18 PM PDT by ASA Vet (http://www.rinorepublic.om)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynachrome
One wonders if he feels the same way about Dred Scott v. Sanford?
19 posted on 07/18/2007 3:13:36 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 2harddrive

It is ok - nothing to see here. The Rudy-lovers here on FR will still vote for him as they worship at his feet...


20 posted on 07/18/2007 3:57:55 PM PDT by TheBattman (I've got TWO QUESTIONS for you....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 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