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

Skip to comments.

Future Obama Court Choices: Don’t Let Constitution Stand in the Way of Liberals
www.FamilySecurityMatters.org ^ | June 25, 2008 | Gregory D. Lee

Posted on 06/25/2008 12:57:34 PM PDT by Security Mom 08

The recent Supreme Court decision of Boumediene v. Bush concerning the habeas corpus rights of enemy combatants held at Guantanamo Naval Base illustrates the need for a president who will nominate jurists that follow the Constitution and not their own political ideology. For the first time, the Court has now extended U.S. constitutional rights to foreign nationals residing outside the country. What's all the more galling is that the recipients of this right were engaged in killing U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Read entire article here 

(Excerpt) Read more at familysecuritymatters.org ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; democrats; elections; judiciary; nobama08; obama; scotus; supremecircus; supremecourt
Okay...maybe McCain isn't your first choice...but if nothing else...we need to control our Supreme Court...having a lib pick the next justices will be the death of our country.
1 posted on 06/25/2008 12:58:06 PM PDT by Security Mom 08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Security Mom 08

What makes anyone think McCain would be good for the Court? He’s already on record as saying that he could never appoint an Alito because “he wears his conservativism on his sleeve”.

McCain would give us three David Souters. A “conservative” who would “grow” on the DC coctail circuit and become a liberal.

I’ve had it with these two parties. Gonna vote Constitution Party.


2 posted on 06/25/2008 1:01:55 PM PDT by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Security Mom 08

True. Obama will appoint liberal judges. McCain may at least appoint more conservative ones. And remember, it’s not just about the Supreme Court, but all the lower courts too.

But at the Supreme Court level, Ginsburg and Stevens are almost certainly going to retire in the next four years, with the replacement to be appointed by whoever wins the presidential election in November.


3 posted on 06/25/2008 1:03:05 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Security Mom 08

While I don’t agree with the Boumediene decision, Bush certainly walked right into it with this whole asinine ‘enemy combatents’ classification and hauling them before legal processes. He should have left them as what they were, prisoners of war. He should have forgotten the whole idea of show trials, in Gitmo or elsewhere. The second he made them civilians and not soldiers, and classified their actions as criminal instead of military, he left the door open for a decision just like this.


4 posted on 06/25/2008 1:10:16 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
McCain may at least appoint more conservative ones.

McCain can appoint whomever he wants. The Democratic-controlled Senate will approve whomever they want. The two may not necessarily be the same.

5 posted on 06/25/2008 1:12:02 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
He should have left them as what they were, prisoners of war. - The second he made them civilians and not soldiers, and classified their actions as criminal instead of military, he left the door open for a decision just like this.

Absolutely correct.

6 posted on 06/25/2008 1:16:15 PM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kjo

Finally, someone else who is going for the CP. I can’t support either of these candidates and the CP right now is the only party pushing for real constitutionalism. If nothing else, it will send a message to the neocon wing of the Republican Party to back down and get REAL conservtaive candidates in.


7 posted on 06/25/2008 1:17:25 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Security Mom 08

Bravo!

You hit the nail on the head, though it seems some are too blind to see it.

All the moonbats need is to install judges that will uphold the “progressive” laws that they want to install and that will render both the executive and legislative parts of our government useless. They learned that one when they managed to get Roe v. Wade rammed through.

It is also why the moonbats got so damned angry about the 2000, 2004 and 2008 elections. They realize that these elections are their last chance to stack the courts (especially the Supreme Court) with judges who have their mindset.

You know I gotta love the people on this board who have a hissy fit and say “McCain is a [insert pet peeve here] and I won’t vote for him”. They are so busy with their noses firmly pressed to their one favorite “pet issue tree” that they can not see the people pouring gasoline on the rest of the forest. They do not grasp the fact that this is probably the most important election we have had since 1860 and if the Democrats win this the country that they knew will no longer be and will never be that way again. All it will take is a couple of “ideologically pure” judges to tear up the constitution. The exercise of free speech on boards such as this will be considered “hate speech” and shut down. Right to bear arms? All it will take is one cleverly crafted lawsuit placed in front of an “ideologically pure” Supreme Court to have that right tossed on the dust bin of history. It will be the same thing with all the issues the “pet issue tree huggers” are so passionate about.

I know some of the “pet issue tree huggers” here will laugh and say it won’t happen. Unfortunately for them they will learn the very hard way that it can and will. Too bad we will not be able to tell them “I told you so” because this forum will be gone.


8 posted on 06/25/2008 1:19:33 PM PDT by Nahanni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

It doesn’t make any sense for him to classify them as civilian if they were captured on the battlefield. And this decision to apply US Constitutional rights to non-citizens on foreign territory is insane. It makes me want to scream.


9 posted on 06/25/2008 1:20:40 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: djsherin
And this decision to apply US Constitutional rights to non-citizens on foreign territory is insane.

The Constitution protects citizens and non-citizens alike. And Gitmo, as a navy base, is not necessarily foreign territory. But had they called Gitmo a POW camp and the inmates 'prisoners of war' then the whole question of Constitutional rights wouldn't have come up.

10 posted on 06/25/2008 1:26:30 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Sorry, I got kind of carried away. I didn’t really read what I wrote. I realize it’s not foreign territory. Technically we’re supposed to pay Cuba for the land, but they haven’t accepted any of our money (so I’ve been told by a 1st Sergeant who worked there). I was just angry about the fact that people captured on the battlefield can be considered “civilians” and not tried under military tribunals. It’s frustrating and hard to understand.


11 posted on 06/25/2008 1:37:57 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

Looks like it’s you and me, pal. McCain’s nomination is a restoration of the old Rockefeller wing of the GOP. He’s just more of the New Deal.

The Consititution Party won’t win, but a vote for the CP will put the GOP on notice.

I hereby fire the two party system.


12 posted on 06/26/2008 4:08:29 AM PDT by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kjo

I agree completely. It’s too bad the Republican Party continues to drift to the neocons... I’m ashamed to admit that throughout much of high school I was “Republican-good, Democrat-bad” which I will say is true much of the time but not all or even most. It’s more like Republican-bad, Democrat-worse. I think the best would be REAL Conservtaive-good, Neocon-bad, and Liberal-worse. I too realize that the CP has little to no chance of victory but I am with that we NEED to send a message to the GOP that we don’t want big government and more intervention.


13 posted on 06/26/2008 11:16:21 AM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

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