To: Prophet in the wilderness
"Why should she be blamed and held accountable to something that the defendant's lawyer did?"
Because she's an appellate judge and there's a 6th amendment right to effective counsel. She voted to affirm the conviction in spite of the lawyer's having slept during trial. As I said before, it wasn't quite as bad as it sounds, but I seriously doubt she'd get an outright majority in the Senate- I expect several Republican senators would vote against her. Honestly, I'm pretty darn conservative, and some of her opinions seem a little overboard to me. She writes with kind of an arrogant style, as if her ideology were the only legitimate one. I'd put her well to the right of a Scalia, who I admire greatly.
posted on 07/07/2005 12:35:18 PM PDT
(Stop illegal immigration: George Allen in 2008)
You're right. Judge Jones' opinion in Burdine will doom her, as well it should. I read that case, and it was WAY worse than it sounds.
The 5th Circuit sitting en banc reversed her, but the damage was done. She'll never be confirmed or I suspect even nominated.
It's too bad. I had followed Judge Jones for years and thought that she would be excellent for the Supreme Court, but Burdine and similar cases tell me that she believes that anything the government does in criminal case is OK, even perjury, false evidence, framing an innocent person. She just doesn't get the "innocent until proven guilty" or "due process" thing. That's disqualifies her from being a Supreme Court justice in my opinion.
I'd vote against her if I were a senator. And that's too bad. She could have been great, but her rabid pro-prosecution stance which even the 5th Circuit couldn't abide is unacceptable.
posted on 07/08/2005 6:04:24 AM PDT
by Iwo Jima
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson