Skip to comments.Robert Bork, known for contentious Supreme Court nomination, dies at 85
Posted on 12/19/2012 1:00:58 PM PST by Mozilla
Former federal judge and conservative legal scholar Robert Bork died early Wednesday at his Virginia home, his family confirmed to CNN. He was 85.
Perhaps best known for his nomination to the Supreme Court by President Ronald Reagan in 1987, Bork was rejected for the post after a contentious confirmation battle led by left-leaning groups that opposed his conservative judicial philosophies.
Bork had recently served as a senior legal adviser to Republican Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. He was a solicitor general during the Nixon administration and first gained notoriety for carrying out the president's order to fire the special prosecutor investigating the Watergate scandal in 1973, an episode known as the Saturday Night Massacre.
But it was the Senate's rejection of his high court nomination that earned the conservative Bork a political legacy -- symbolic of the contentious, partisan nature of congressional confirmations.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
An early victim of the left’s Politics of Pesonal Destruction.
>>An early victim of the lefts Politics of Pesonal Destruction.<<
True dat. Libs are like weeds. They just coming back until they take over the garden.
He was truly one of the great legal minds of our time. It is a travesty that he was not confirmed to the Court.
He was the poster child for the left’s encroaching totalitarianism and unwillingness to hear other opinions. Wish people had noticed back then that something wasn’t right. Could have nipped it in the bud. They tried the same crap with Clarence Thomas which was to tear him down.
As others have menioned numerous times, thank God he wasn’t because Obama would be picking his replacement.
He was kept off the court by a Republican....the bastards’ name was ARLEN SPECTER....may he rot in.........
Not many are accorded the distinction of having their name become a verb, a portion of our immeasurable debt to Ted Kennedy, of Kennedy-Dodd waitress sandwich fame.
He didn’t deserve the treatment he got. It shows what lengths the radical man-hating abortion-loving feminazis will go to destroy anyone who gets in their way.
I was a Nixon hater and a Watergate junkie. I would watch every minute I could of the hearings. After the Saturday Night Massacre, I was fit to be tied and wanted Bork’s head.
However, after he was nominated to the SCOTUS, I watched those hearings too. And although I “hated” him, it was obvious he was imminently qualified and would make decisions based on the Constitution and not ideology.
Since elections have consequences, Reagan had the rock solid right to nominate his candidate and have him approved. The Senate is simply a last bulwark against an obvious inept political appointee.
After hearing his testimony, I felt “why even bother with a roll call vote?” This guy is so qualified a simple voice vote of 100% is warranted.
That was when I discovered that Democrats didn’t give a rat’s patootie about the Constitution.
The next SCOTUS hearings (Clarence Thomas) sealed the deal when it was revealed that the Democrats hadn’t jettisoned their racist past. They had just politicized it.
I haven’t (and will never) vote for a Democrat again.
Thanks for the post - he was a good man. Prayers for his family and loved ones...
Let’s not forget that Mr. Bork’s nomination was destroyed by a drunken lying, philanderer, coward, killer named Teddy.
Maybe. Maybe not. He’s been sick for a while. Probably would’ve retired during the Bush administration (like he retired from teaching law school).
Either way, his replacement was Anthony Kennedy. Every 5-4 ruling where Kennedy sided with the liberals would’ve gone the other way. Including abortion.
You welcome. R.I.P. Robert Bork. He was a good man and did not deserve the badgering he got in 1987 trying to make the Supreme Court. It still bothers me how easily the left tore him down. I am glad they couldn’t get away with Clarence Thomas.
Yes. A good man in a corrupt culture.
Didn’t Bork later complain that Ronald W. Reagan did practically nothing to bolster the nomination other than making it?
Here is Robert Bork’s bibliography:
Yes, Specter; Bork was from PA too, but Specter was born in KS. You forgot ol’ John Warner’s opposition to Bork.
This is an interesting little item that is often overlooked in Bork's past. I've read in several places that this particular issue resulted in a lot of very soft GOP support for his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.
So Obama would have replaced Bork, unless he would have quit before Bush left office.
I had the same thought. Bork woud have had to retitre in 2005, at age 78, when O’Connor retired (at age 73 IIRC).
Yep, it's possible, but AuH2ORepublican is probably right that Bork would have retired during Bush's second term rather than risk a RAT winning the Presidency in 2008. He was 60 at the time of his nomination, one of the reasons we need to nominate younger judges. Few would anticipate a 60 year old staying on the court for 25 years, though it seems routine for Senators to stick around that long.
It would be interesting to go back and look at all the 5-4 decisions over the last 25 years where Justice Kennedy sided with the liberals, because nearly all of them would have gone the other way. This would be a very different country today. As others noted, Roe v. Wade might have been overturned in the Casey decision of 1992. (I think that ruling might have been 6-3 though).
Bork did accurately predict we were "Slouching towards Gomorrah" in 1996. Sorry, George W. Bush. Even your veep jumped on the bandwagon, at least on the gay marriage thing.
Gerald Ford actually considered Bork for a SCOTUS seat in the 70s, but concluded (accurately, unfortunately) that he was "too controversial" because of his role in Richard Nixon's firing of Watergate Special Prosecutor, and the Dems would destroy him. So Ford crossed him off the short list and we eventually ended with the horrid John Paul Stevens.
Incidentally, Specter and five other RINOs joined the Dems in opposing Bork. Yet we're always told we "have to" elect RINO Senators so we can get good judges on the courts. Poo.
Casey was 6-3 (Kennedy and O’Connor both switched to support Roe’s ridiculous holding), but once Thomas replaced Marshall the Court had 4 strong votes to overturn Roe, and had Bork been there instead of Kennedy then there would have been 5 solid votes to overturn. (Of course, a couple of years later White was replaced with Ginsburg, but by that time Roe would no longer be a binding precedent and O’Connor could cite stare decisis to uphold the precedent stating that states could ban abortion.)
I noticed just as I hit “post” that I forgot to mention that, had Bork been on the Court instead of Kennedy, O’Connor likely would have voted in Casey to overturn Roe’s central holding, since it was Kennedy signing on that gave her the courage to make that ridiculous stare decisis argument in the first place.
Great quotation!!! It belongs in an historical anthology of American political wisdom.
> Libs are like weeds. They just coming back until they take over the garden.
Libs are like weed — they just keep coming back until someone smokes them.
That's the infamous and asinine quote from the late Teddy that CNN is so happy to repeat, despite the fact that it was nothing but slanderous.
Yes, to borrow Kennedy's metaphor, federal judges do "shut the doors of the federal courts on the fingers of millions of citizens," but Kennedy and his ilk would never admit that they are more often leftist judges who commonly do exactly that to Americans who are white, male, and heterosexual (as well as others) whose rights are trampled upon by ever more powerful government - be it federal, state, or local.
Tonight, a lib I know posted that Republicans want to taint the milk because they won’t sign on to some AG Bill. They are certifiable. But they never stop the insanity.