Skip to comments.NO MORE BETRAYALS: Sen. Josh Hawley Just Set The Standard For Conservative Supreme Court Justices
Posted on 07/27/2020 1:43:28 PM PDT by Kaslin
'If there is no indication in their record that at any time they have acknowledged that Roe was wrong at the time it was decided, then Im not going to vote for them.'
Social conservatives are done being taken for granted by the GOP: That’s the message Sen. Josh Hawley shot across the party and administration’s bow Sunday, setting a brave and admirable standard for Christian legislators that is sure to pit him against powerful Washington Republicans and Democrats.
I will vote only for those Supreme Court nominees who have explicitly acknowledged that Roe v. Wade is wrongly decided. Hawley told The Washington Post. By explicitly acknowledged, I mean on the record and before they were nominated.
I dont want private assurances from candidates. I dont want to hear about their personal views, one way or another. Im not looking for forecasts about how they may vote in the future or predictions. I dont want any of that. I want to see on the record, as part of their record, that they have acknowledged in some forum that Roe v. Wade, as a legal matter, is wrongly decided.
The junior senator from Missouri is a member of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, through which any of President Donald Trump’s potential future nominees to the Supreme Court must pass before being brought to the floor for a vote. Conservative judges have been a major point for this administration, beginning during the campaign when, working closely with The Federalist Society and The Heritage Foundation, Trump released a list of who he would nominate, exciting then-skeptical conservatives.
Since then, conservatives have been routinely disappointed by Republican-nominated justices, quietly complaining about the GOP and the powerful, conservative Federalist Society’s tendency to focus on justices who have established records of conservative and libertarian business and government rulings, but no firmly established record of rulings that protect either marriage or the lives of the unborn.
Wary of Democrat opposition and the screaming protests that often come with it, Republican nominees have practiced the habit of privately visiting with the senators whose votes they need for confirmation, promising they are personally opposed to abortion, et cetera.
This will no longer fly with him, Hawley told the Post Sunday: “Roe is central to judicial philosophy. Roe is and was an unbridled act of judicial imperialism. It marks the point the modern Supreme Court said, You know, we dont have to follow the Constitution. We wont even pretend to try.'”
The decision puts him at odds with Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, both socially liberal Republicans who have pledged not to vote for a nominee openly opposed to Roe v. Wade. West Virginia Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito has also voiced pro-abortion views. Democrats, particularly Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, are known to push Republican nominees to say they oppose Roe v. Wade during confirmation hearings, operating under the tragically correct assumption that such a statement will galvanize liberal opposition and frighten Republican supporters.
Hawley’s stance also sets the 40-year-old rising star up for battle with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has made confirmations a priority and, like many other prominent Republicans, pays lip-service to social conservatives while avoiding putting his more vulnerable members in the difficult position of having to deliver on socially conservative issues.
To McConnell’s credit, he shocked conservative Republicans at the end of President Barack Obama’s second term, blocking Obama nominee Merrick Garland from the bench, saying it was too close to an election for such a far-reaching decision. This frightened Washington Republicans, who feared a President Hillary Clinton would successfully nominate an even more liberal justice than Obama had. Under McConnell’s near-singular focus, the Senate has confirmed 200 Trump nominees to courts across the country.
The Supreme Court, however, outraged Christians and conservatives in late June when Chief Justice John Roberts, a President George W. Bush appointee, sided with the pro-abortion side of the court, striking down a Louisiana law that mandated abortion clinics in the state be able to admit women to a hospital within 30 miles. The state has three clinics, The Washington Free Beacon reports, which perform 10,000 abortions a year. The law could have closed two of the clinics.
“After todays disappointing decision by [Supreme Court],” Vice President Mike Pence tweeted that afternoon, “one thing is clear: We need more Conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.”
“It’s maybe not the majority we thought it was,” President Trump told The Federalist’s Ben Domenech in an Oval Office interview just two days prior, and five days after Justice Neil Gorsuch joined Roberts and the left to use the court to extend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to groups it did not cover in legislation. Gorsuch, Trump’s first nominee to the court, was hotly anticipated by conservatives. Were just one justice away from losing the court, and the next four years, you get two, maybe three, maybe even four. You just need one, and then we lose the court and the country as we know it.
This standard, for me, applies to Supreme Court nominees, whether theyre a sitting judge or whatever, Hawley said. If there is no indication in their record that at any time they have acknowledged that Roe was wrong at the time it was decided, then Im not going to vote for them — and I dont care who nominates them.
During the court’s 2018-2019 session, over 10 separate rulings, every one of the five Republican justices joined their liberal colleagues to deliver the left a five-four majority. “By contrast,” court reporter Kevin Daley wrote at the close of the session, “the conservative justices joined together to form a five-member majority in seven cases.”
This is not an attempt to push forward a particular person, Hawley said. This is about where Im going to be on Supreme Court nominees.
Hawley, an economic populist and social conservative, is a favorite of the rising movement in the GOP, harking back to an older understanding of American conservatism best embodied in modern politics by Pat Buchanan and, now, Tucker Carlson.
Most U.S. Senators elected as conservatives start out great and then become part of the Washington swamp network. McCain, Hatch and Toomey being prime examples. Sen. Helms was one of the few who got better with age and Sen. Hawley looks like he might become such an exception as well.
Select someone who can’t be BLACKMAILED like Roberts is!
Sound thinking. God bless him.
Definitely throwing some shade at the President’s two picks. And dropping bombs on Bush 2’s pick, that f*cking fraud. But, I wonder if his views conflict with some of the folks on the President’s short list, especially someone like Barrett and a few of the other women. Not that being woman is the only reason to pick any of them, but it is what it is. Can’t have an all male SCOTUS, not happening in this day and age.
GOP and the powerful, conservative Federalist Societys tendency to focus on justices who have established records of conservative and libertarian business and government rulings, but no firmly established record of rulings that protect either marriage or the lives of the unborn.
Hawley is right, IMHO. If you’re on the record as being against that decision, then your Conservative Card is more or less punched.
Some of the other stuff is a no-brainer. I say that with the caveat that Roberts is and will continue to be a complete disaster, for as long as he is there. And he’ll only get worse. He’ll go further than Kennedy, who voted out of compassion as his time came to an end, and be worse as he’ll do it on spite for all those that loathe him. A list that continues to grow. Hopefully, if the President gets to replace RBG, and maybe another Lib on the court, Roberts will take his leave knowing that he won’t matter anymore. One can hope.
Absolutely. He is a big disapointment
I’m all for Hawley’s idea, but a candidate that has that in his/her record will be subjected to a hearing that would make the Kavanaugh hearing look like the trial of a Cub Scout accused of being late for a meeting. Unfortunately that is what we are up against. Good luck with getting that person confirmed and then living to take the seat on the bench. Only an Act of God can get such a person confirmed. We will just have to pray that the Almighty will intervene.
Select someone who cant be BLACKMAILED like Roberts is!
Why can’t we find out what Roberts is being blackmailed for and then make it public?
Make him relinquish his USSC position.
Only gun owners who truly respect the second amendment. That is sole criteria I care about.
Word is that Hawley is positioning for a Whitehouse run in 2024. So far I like what I see but he caved on renaming the military bases.
I believe that Senator Hawley clerked for John Roberts. That having been said, I think that Hawley and Cruz are the senators that I respect the most as far as identifying the best SCOTUS nominees.
I am becoming more and more impressed with Sen. Hawley.
I’m being less and less impressed with Sen. Hawley. He’s running his mouth like a typical swamp Senator. He needs put the rubber on the road and insist his party engage instead of tweeting up a storm. Frankly, he reminds of Ben Sasse. Another new star who faded badly.
Litmus tests exist for a reason.
I’ve used litmus paper many times.
Pardon the pun but Hawley is preaching to the choir. I’ve no time for these U. S. Senator who strut about and run their mouths like this the Senate is a debate club. Hawley is a member of the majority party in the Senate. Yet he seems to spend most of his time tweeting to no effect. We should expect more than that.
I guess you are like me: sick and tired of people running their mouths without concrete, decisive action
Make sure they cant be blackmailed.
I posted my first impression of Hawley back in December, after watching him during impeachment.
Mr Hawley is building quite a résumé for higher office. Yale Law, President of Yale Chapter Federalist Society, Lawyer (apparently specializing in defending religious liberties), Clerked for Chief Justice of SCOTUS, Professor of law, State Attorney General, Senator, young, tall, handsome, married to a pretty blond Lawyer/Professor of Law and has 2 kids. He has a disarming demeanor that reminds me just a little bit of Reagan, while his understated wit cuts without offending, just like Reagan. Is he the real deal? He certainly bears watching.
This action get's him some attention, and support in the pro-life movement, but could hurt him with other constituencies. Still, nice to see he has the courage to stand up for his beliefs.
And dropping bombs on Bush 2s pick, that f*cking fraud.
Both Josh and his wife Erin Hawley clerked for Chief Justice Roberts. In fact, that is how they met. If this slight was aimed at Roberts, as many interpret, it's both brutal and personal.
Have either of Trump's selections ever said Roe was OK? What makes him think any future one will?
And should Biden win then the chance of Hawley ever voting to confirm them hovers somewhere between zero and none. Josh is grandstanding again.
You are an idiot
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.