Skip to comments.McCain: Bork Was No "Maverick Jurist"
Posted on 07/08/2008 2:05:44 PM PDT by Maelstorm
McCain: Bork Was No "Maverick Jurist"
John McCain is planning to be in North Carolina tomorrow where he is scheduled to give a speech on judicial nominations:
John McCains campaign said Friday that Fred Thompson and Sam Brownback will join the presumptive GOP nominee in North Carolina next week for a major speech on judicial appointments.
Both Thompson and Brownback have endorsed the Arizona senator, and both Republicans presented themselves throughout the Republican primary battle as consistent conservatives, particularly regarding social issues and judicial appointments.
The speech, to be held Tuesday at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, will be just one element of a broader outreach to conservatives next week, according to the campaign.
McCain is expected to discuss the kinds of judges he would appoint up and down the federal bench.
Why he is doing this on the day of the Democratic primary in the state is hard to understand. Perhaps he is hoping to work his way into the press coverage or perhaps he is hoping to keep a rather low profile while he delivers remarks designed solely to, once again, assure the GOPs right-wing base that hell appoint justices like John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court without attracting too much attention from the media.
Either way, hes probably hoping that the press wont bother to actually write about his record on judges as exemplified by, say, his 1987 support of Robert Bork [PDF]:
I would like to explain why I am going to vote of favor of confirmation [of Robert Bork], and why I do so without any hesitation I believe that what the Senate should appropriately examine in a nominee are: Integrity and character, legal competence, and philosophy and judicial temperament. I believe Robert Bork is well qualified in all four respects Judge Borks honesty, integrity, and diligence are above reproach [he] demonstrates that he is not some intellectual loose cannon on deck, or a quixotic maverick jurist , but is a thoughtful, reasonable, jurist [he] is hardly a radical, but is rather a very thoughtful judge in synch with the vast majority of his colleagues on the bench.
First, and most importantly, is the question of Judge Borks view of the role of the judiciary. Judge Bork is clearly a believer in judicial restraint. He believes that the courts should not create social policy or arbitrate social policy disputes unless the Constitution clearly speaks to the issues. He believes that in our republican form of government such decisions are properly left to legislatures elected by the people, not Federal judges appointed for life. I have no problem with that view, because I wholeheartedly agree with it.
I have no problem with my colleagues voting against Bork if they truly believe he is unfit for the Supreme Court although I personally cannot conceive of how you could reach that conclusion I believe Robert Bork will be an outstanding Justice and contributor on that Court Robert Bork deserves our support and will be a great Supreme Court Justice.
In his endorsement, McCain delivered a lengthy defense of Borks controversial views, stating that Roe v. Wade is "the clearest example of judicial 'legislation'" and that the rules it set out are "nonsense." Nor did McCain appear to be a fan of the right to privacy, stating that it was entirely "created by Justice Douglas in the Griswold case."
Joining McCain will be Fred Thompson, who shares McCains affinity for Justices like Roberts and Alito and is already out making the pitch for McCain on the issue of judges, and Sen. Sam Brownback, who endorsed McCain after his own presidential campaign folded in the early-going, in part to help pay off his campaign debt, but also because he was promised that he would play an advisory role in helping decide who he should nominate for the Supreme Court. That undoubtedly appealed to Brownback because, as he repeatedly stated when he was campaigning, he wanted nothing more than to be the president that appoints the justice that's needed vote to overturn Roe vs. Wade." While he wont get that opportunity to do that directly, advising McCain on Supreme Court nominations will still allow him to play an important role in finding a Supreme Court nominee that will finally eliminate the right to choose.
McCain should wear this criticism by “People for the American [sic!] Way” as a badge of honor. Long Live Bork!
You tell em!
McCain voted against Ginsberg right?
Looks like McLame might be getting a scent of the roses and skewing toward the right just a bit.
If only.... if only...
—Bork is one weird dude who doesn’t understand the first thing about the Second Amendment—
The company he is keeping is much more honorable.
“I think those of you who wish to cast doubt on McCain and judges should take a look at history.”
I know that those of you that use judges as reason to vote for the jerk purposefully “forget” who runs the Senate. Even if the jerk nominated an acceptable judge to you and I, Leahy on the judicial comittee will just say “no” and then we get the Juanito doing what he does best, working with his (actual) political party to (once again) screw America.
Libs didn’t like Bork because he was much smarter than they. Hmmmm, guess that’s why libs don’t like most of the people they meet.
How are we supposed to get excited when he touted that he also voted for the likes of Ginsberg?
“A President McCain will find he can only appoint (and get confirmed) judges the Dems approve. They will most probably have an even bigger control in the Senate.”
And people were saying that Juanito would have no coat tails, LOL!
True...imagine how intimidated then the founding fathers brilliance would intimidate today's 'Rat and RINO cretins!
The four liberal justices are the most likely to leave the court during the next presidential term. Should two of them or one plus Kennedy go, McCain could appoint the most conservative replacements he could find. The Senate could refuse to bring the appointees up for confirmation vote if they wanted, but the remaining four conservative justices would control the court. A four to three decision is just as good as a five to four one. Since there is no constitutional requirement for nine justices, a president could leave a vacancy unfilled if he wanted. There would be no reason for the president to compromise.
If John McLaim is elected President... the victory party over at Teddy Kennedy house would quite a shindig.. You know with all his liberal friends..
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.