Gonzales: Roberts Abortion Questions Would “Certainly Be Appropriate”
Gonzales: Roberts Abortion Questions Would “Certainly Be Appropriate”
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said yesterday that he believes it would be “certainly be appropriate” for the Judiciary Committee to question John Roberts about his personal views on abortion rights.
Gonzales also appeared to take sides in a debate between Senate Judiciary Committee members Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and John Cornyn (R-TX) over whether senators should ask John Roberts if Roe v. Wade “was correctly decided.” Cornyn has called on Schumer to avoid such questions, since they “will undoubtedly force [Roberts] to prejudge a case that is currently pending on the court’s docket.” But Gonzales seems to think differently:
Putting himself in Roberts’ place, Gonzales said he would want to review the court filings, transcripts of arguments and law at the time. He said Roberts “may be in a position” to answer the question [about Roe v. Wade].
Senate conservatives are so intent on sheltering Roberts from tough questioning that even one of President Bush’s most trusted aides is a moderating voice.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Let me get this straight, one of dumbya’s cronies (i’m guessing catholic) is saying it is “fair game” to question ANOTHER OF dumbya’s cronies….
I SMELL SOMETHING, AND IT AIN’T LUNCH.
August 31st, 2005 at 12:17 pmTITANIC: The LAST SHIP to “stay the course”
It sounds like dumbya’s cronies have already started the in-fighting, and are ready to jump this ship that is staying the course.
August 31st, 2005 at 12:19 pmPerhaps the base is putting pressure on the administration to scuttle the confirmation by giving Dems an opening. Regardless, I still believe that a bloody battle over Roberts does not serve us.
August 31st, 2005 at 12:20 pmEvidently no one is supposed to ask a person who is going to sit on the Surpreme Court and make decisions on us for the rest of our lives anything meaningful. Only cookie-cutter questions like “what schools do your kids go to” or “do you think Calvin Coolidge was a good president” or “do you prefer dark oak or light oak on your new desk?” The republicans would have us think that being nominated is the last step and confirmation is automatic.
Bullshit. I want to know what this guy is made of, where he stands on basic principles, and where, exactly, is he planning to take this country over the next 30 or 40 years.
August 31st, 2005 at 1:48 pmHank,
Why should an appointment by a Republican president face tougher standards than one appointed by a Democratic one? You can ask him any question you want, but Roberts may choose to follow Ginsberg’s example and not answer them. End of debate. What are you afraid of anyway?
August 31st, 2005 at 2:24 pmBack to basics:…..IMPARTIAL…you know the lady with the BLINDFOLD on….all of them should be 100% impartial as we’ve all lost sight of their job. Lifetime job….no way ever! They just threw the last election….shame for life! Sorry founding fathers, we have a bought off government.
August 31st, 2005 at 3:30 pmI think Hank and most of us here are afraid of our civil liberties being yanked from us under the phone guise of protection. I am scared as hell.
August 31st, 2005 at 3:33 pmRed, if the Republicans choose not to question a candidate for the Supreme Court, that is their business. But I damned sure want my representative to dig into them and do what the constitution tells them they should do.
Now let me ask you something: If a candidate runs for office, would you vote for him just because your party told you to? Ok, maybe you would. But suppose it was a DEMOCRAT you were to vote blindly for. Would you do it without question? Uh-huh.
August 31st, 2005 at 3:55 pmI personally feel that ALL OF HIS OPINIONS should be questioned without limits. When and if a person will lay his cards on the table (one will if they are honest) and tell their honest opinions in life, we will have a true indication of their morals or lack thereof.
If a person opposes abortion, then you can expect their decisions to reflect the same.
If a person opposes civil rights, then you can expect their decisions to reflect the same.
If a person takes a lifetime job because they have given personal favors, then their decisions will reflect the ideals of the person or politician that benefited from those “favors”.
So, it really is simple. Question everything, and if you like the answers, appoint him.
If he turns out to be a right-wing bigot that favors the “old south’s” values of hating gays, blacks, jews and is pro-life to the point of killing abortion doctors, send him packing.
September 1st, 2005 at 1:36 amCorrect me if I’m wrong, but I’m starting to think that just maybe we should actually question the president’s judgement here.
September 1st, 2005 at 9:35 am#10, I have all along. In my town, I am no longer seeing the mass display of the disgusting little w stickers. Guess they are questioning too. My state may have turned blue. I guess we’ll see.
September 1st, 2005 at 12:04 pmThat just means that Bushco and Roberts have come up with a legalese answer that calls Roe into question on technical grounds, and they want that argument to be on the record.
Think strategically.
September 1st, 2005 at 1:37 pm