|
smoo, R v W is not on the "never overturn" list... it just requires that a clear majority of the court be totally conservative, and the right case come up (and trust me, with a conservative court, the case will come up). It won't be direct, but an indirect picking away at that the ruling. There is at least one case in the current term that will hit on the edges of the ruling.
Just like a building, you can keep pulling out the supports and it will keep standing until one day someone leans on the side, and the whole thing falls over. The intention of Bush and his most conservative backers isn't to build Rome in a day, but to set the stage for a VERY long and gradual turn to the right that will bring the court to a very conservative position overall without any sudden turns that would wake the public up.
Appointing a guy with limited judicial experience as the chief Justice, and then nominating someone with NO judicial experience is a major slap in the face to all the long serving circuit court judges, and an insult to the American people.
I personally feel that someone with little out front experience, who is overtly religeous, and who lacks fundimental judicial experience is not someone you want to have on the court of the next 20 - 30 years. There are plenty of good, solid, experienced judges out there in the federal circuit courts that are much more known and much more proven candidates than this woman. Nominate one of them, nominate here as a federal judge, and give her a few years to learn how it works when you put the robes on.
Alex
|
2005-10-03, 10:07 AM
Threaded Mode