Press Conference: Owen, the Classic Judicial Activist
Press Conference: Owen, the Classic Judicial Activist
The President likes to believe that his judicial nominees are being opposed because the candidates are individuals who believe in the philosphy that a judge should simply interpret the law rather than make the law from the bench. However, Judge Priscilla Owen — who may be the judicial nominee that Senate conservatives use to trigger the nuclear option — is widely opposed because of her judicial activism. Upon her nomination, several Texas papers weighed in. Here are some excerpts:
Austin-American Statesman, 4/29/03: “[O]wen is so conservative that she places herself out of the broad mainstream of jurisprudence. She seems all too willing to bend the law to fit her views, rather than the reverse.”
The Houston Chronicle, 5/12/03: “Owen’s judicial record shows less interest in impartially interpreting the law than in pushing an agenda…a justice who has shown a clear preference for ruling to achieve a particular result rather than impartially interpreting the law. Anyone willing to look objectively at Owen’s record would be hard-pressed to deny that.”
San Antonio Express, 7/21/02: “Once competency is established, the most important qualification for a judge is commitment to following the law as it is written - regardless of personal philosophy. Justice Priscilla Owen is clearly competent, but her record demonstrates a results-oriented streak that belies supporters’ claims that she strictly follows the law…The Senate should not block a judicial nominee simply because he or she is more conservative or more liberal than the Senate’s majority party. It also should not engage in petty personal attacks. But concerns about Owen go to the heart of what makes a good judge…When a nominee has demonstrated a propensity to spin the law to fit philosophical beliefs, it is the Senate’s right - and duty - to reject that nominee.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
4 Responses to “Press Conference: Owen, the Classic Judicial Activist”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Any chance you could provide links to these?
April 30th, 2005 at 10:56 amAny chance you could actually cite some decision, rather than general opinions of her? Or did the articles have no discussion of that, either?
May 1st, 2005 at 6:28 pmWho will tell the people?——————– SHOCK & AWE————————
May 1st, 2005 at 7:08 pm———-DEMOCRATS CREATE WEALTH AND JOBS———–
1.From Harding In 1921 to Bush in 2003
2.Democrats held White House for 40 years and Republicans for 42.5 years.
3.Democrats created 75,820,000 net new jobs — Republicans 36,440,000.
4.Per Year Averageâ€â€Democrats 1,825,200—Republicans 856,400.
5.Republicans had 9 presidents during the period and 6 had depression or recession.
6.Republicans had a recession/depression in 177 months and Democrats in 32 months.
7.DOWâ€â€grew by 52% more under Democrats.
8.GDPâ€â€grew by 43% more under Democrats.
————————————————————————————————————
Comparing Democrat’s hero-CLINTONâ€â€versus Republican’s hero–REAGAN
———————————————————————————————————–
1.JOBSâ€â€grew by 43% more under Clinton.
2.GDP—grew by 57% more under Clinton.
3.DOWâ€â€grew by 700% more under Clinton..
4.NASDAQ-grew by 18 times as much under Clinton.
4.SPENDING–grew by 28% under Clinton—80% under Reagan.
5.DEBTâ€â€grew by 43% under Clintonâ€â€187% under Reagan.
6. DEFICITSâ€â€Clinton got a large surplus–grew by 112% under Reagan.
7.NATIONAL INCOMEâ€â€grew by100% more under Clinton.
8.PERSONAL INCOMEâ€â€Grew by 110% more under Clinton.
SOURCESâ€â€Bureau of Labor Statistics (www.BLS.Gov)–Economic Policy Institute (EPI.org)â€â€Global & World Almanacs from 1980 to 2003 (annual issues)
http://www.the-hamster.com (chart taken from NY Times)
National Archives History on Presidents. http://www.nara.gov
Clarence Swinney-Political Historian
Please submit comments to cwswinney@netzero.net or P.O. Box 3411-Burlington NC-27216
Please call me a Tax & Spend Liberal. I pay My Way.
Tax & Spend=Pay Your Way
Spend & Borrow=Kids Pay Tomorrow
From G. Washington to Reagan we ended with a 917 Billion Debt.
The next 12 years of Spend & Borrow Conservatism added on over 3,000 Billion.
In four years,Spend & Borrow Bush has added on more than we had after 200 years of tax & Spend Pay Your Way.
May 1st, 2005 at 7:13 pmBAD NEWS–The 5 year forecast in Bush 2006 Budget reveals we will add on 2400 Billion in his second term.
clarence swinney
political historian
http://www.cwswinney@netzero.net