|
SAVE THE SUPREME COURT — SAVE WOMEN'S LIVES
Potential George W. Bush Supreme Court Nominees(Listed in alphabetical order) Judge Samuel Alito | Judge Danny Boggs Judge Samuel Alito Given the nickname "Scalito" because of the striking similarities between his judicial philosophy and that of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Judge Samuel Alito of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Newark, New Jersey wrote a very troubling opinion concerning reproductive rights in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992). The Third Circuit in Casey upheld most of the restrictive abortion-related measures passed by the Pennsylvania legislature in the late 1980's, in an opinion that questioned Roe v. Wade yet struck down a requirement that women notify their spouses before having an abortion. Alito dissented because he would have gone even further than the rest of the court and would have upheld the spousal notification requirement. He claimed that there was no showing that notification would be an undue burden on women's constitutional right to abortion. The Supreme Court in Casey refused to accept Alito's view, except for the dissenters who voted to overturn Roe (Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas.) Alito also concurred but refused to join the majority opinion in Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Farmer, 220 F.3d 127 (3rd Cir. 2000), which struck down New Jersey's so-called "partial birth" abortion law. Alito emphasized that the case was squarely controlled by the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Stenberg v. Carhart, but he carefully avoided endorsing its legal reasoning. Biographical information: More information: Legal Momentum: The Future of the Supreme Court | PDF version Judge Danny Boggs The nomination of Judge Danny Boggs, chief judge of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court in Kentucky, to the United States Supreme Court would raise extremely troubling and serious concerns. A number of Boggs's decisions are far outside the mainstream and would severely limit the federal government's power to enact public health, safety, welfare, and environmental protections. He would also shield states from liability for violations of laws protecting workers and people with disabilities and effectively ban affirmative action. Boggs' scathing personal criticisms of his fellow judges, as well as ethical issues, also raise serious questions about his temperament and fitness for the Supreme Court. Biographical information: More information: Affirmative Action and Diversity Project: A Court Intrigue The Michigan Daily: Decision Reversed Justice Raoul G. Cantero, III Previously a private practice lawyer representing business and governmental entities, Justice Raoul G. Cantero III was appointed to Florida Supreme Court by Governor Jeb Bush on July 10, 2002. The grandson of the Cuban dictator, Batista, Cantero has ties to the anti-Castro movement. Controversy has sprung up regarding Cantero's defense of Orlando Bosch, a Cuban American whom the Justice Department labeled a terrorist. In addition, several newspapers have commented on Cantero's anti-abortion views. As the Bradenton Herald reports, "The conservative Catholic has publicly defended anti-abortion protestors with the comment that 'abortions kill children.'" (7/11/2002). Similarly, the Fort Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel describes Cantero as "vigorously anti-abortion." (9/4/2002). The Associated Press notes that Cantero has "strident anti-abortion views," (7/12/2002). Biographical information: More information: The Miami Herald: Bush Praises Newest Justice Miguel Estrada When Miguel Estrada was nominated to the D.C. Court of Appeals in 2003-a nomination from which he later withdrew-he refused to reveal his positions on Roe v. Wade and Romer v. Evans, the case that struck down Colorado's anti-gay rights measures. A member of the Federalist Society and a board member of the arch-conservative Center for the Community Interest, Estrada's supervisor in the Solicitor General's office has said that Estrada "lacks the judgment" and is "too much of an ideologue to be an appeals court judge." Estrada is now a practicing attorney in Washington, D.C. Biographical information: Alliance for Justice: Independent Judiciary More information: National Women's Law Center: Statement Urging Senate to Reject Estrada Nomination to D.C. Circuit Organizations Opposed to the Confirmation of Miguel Estrada Judge Emilio Garza The nomination of Judge Emilio Garza of San Antonio, Texas, who serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, to the Supreme Court would raise deep concerns for everyone who cares about a woman's right to choose abortion and birth control as well as many other important issues. Garza has twice written opinions specifically rejecting the reasoning of Roe v. Wade, and has even gone as far as suggesting Roe may no longer be good law. Garza's decisions in other key areas raise questions about his ability to fairly decide cases. More information: Legal Momentum: Supreme Court Dossier: Garza (PDF) Legal Momentum: The Future of the Supreme Court | PDF version Attorney General Alberto Gonzales For years, Gonzales has been an indispensable part of the Bush team-from a Bush sidekick in Texas, to White House Counsel, and now Attorney General. Gonzales' minimal experience as a judge and limited exposure to critical areas of law raises concerns, since his only judicial experience was as a member for less than two years of the Texas Supreme Court, which hears only state-law based civil cases. Before his brief stint on the Texas Supreme Court, Gonzales practiced real estate and business law for companies-including Enron-for 13 years. Gonzales has little or no experience dealing with many of the issues that regularly come before the Supreme Court of the United States, and his involvement in the Abu Ghraib scandals are also cause for concern. Biographical information: Official White House Biography More information: Center for American Progress: A Record of Injustice Center for American Progress: Ten Questions for Alberto Gonzales Human Rights First: The Nomination of Alberto Gonzales for Attorney General Star Tribune (Minneapolis) Editorial: Alberto Gonzales has blood on his hands Judge Ricardo H. Hinojosa Despite more than 20 years of experience on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Hinojosa, who also serves as the Chair of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, is largely unknown as a judge because he almost never publishes his opinions. People deserve to know much more about any nominee to a lifetime position on the highest court in the land. Few judgments can be made about this nomination until after a thorough hearing in the Senate. Yet there are signs that Hinojosa would be a faithful conservative vote on the court, including his professional reputation and his personal relationship with the Bush family. The burden must be on Judge Hinojosa to demonstrate that he can be fair and independent and that he is committed to equal justice and individual rights. More information: The Third Branch: USSC Chair A Recess Appointment Judge Edith Jones Judge Edith Jones of Houston, Texas, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, is a far right-wing jurist whose nomination to the Supreme Court would raise extremely serious concerns. She had been considered for the Supreme Court seat that went to Clarence Thomas. Jones' record shows an insensitivity and hostility towards victims of sexual harassment, employment discrimination, and due process violations, as well as towards the laws and precedents that protect them. She also has a very troubling record on reproductive rights, having called Roe "an exercise in raw judicial power." Biographical information: More information: Legal Momentum: The Future of the Supreme Court | PDF version Judge J. Michael Luttig Fourth Circuit Judge J. Michael Luttig's record should disqualify him from elevation to the Supreme Court. His record on the Court of Appeals, located in Virginia, evinces a strong hostility toward women's reproductive rights, protections against discrimination on the basis of race and gender, protection of the environment, and the rights of criminal defendants and death penalty petitioners. He has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to run roughshod over Congress' authority, striking down the Violence Against Women Act, and sharply curtailing the federal power to enact protections in many areas. In addition, Luttig, originally from Tyler, Texas, was a law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia during Scalia's years as an appellate court judge. At the relatively young age of 50, a confirmation of Judge Luttig to the Supreme Court has the potential to shape Court decisions for decades. Biographical information: More information: Legal Momentum: The Future of the Supreme Court | PDF version Judge Michael McConnell Judge McConnell, Denver 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, has an extensive record of vehement opposition to Roe v. Wade and to a woman's fundamental constitutional rights of reproductive choice and privacy. In a Wall Street Journal editorial, McConnell called Roe v. Wade "an embarrassment to those who take constitutional law seriously" (Jan. 22, 1998). In 1996, he signed a statement calling for the reversal of Roe, contending "The Supreme Court brought great discredit on itself by overturning state laws regulating abortion without any persuasive basis in constitutional text or logic." McConnell has also delivered written testimony opposing the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE), which prohibits violence or physical obstruction at abortion clinics. McConnell testified in support of the "constitutional right to protest against abortion-forcefully and face-to-face." In addition to his anti-abortion views, McConnell has troubling views on civil rights and church and state separation-he criticized a Supreme Court ruling that stripped Bob Jones University of its tax-exempt status because of its racially discriminatory policies, and he argued that the Boy Scouts should not be compelled to keep a scoutmaster who is gay. McConnell is also a strong voice in favor of state-subsidization of religious institutions and school vouchers. In a 1999 law review article, he broadly criticized the concept of separation of church and state. He has argued that the Constitution allows broad public funding of religious institutions, and that taxpayers do not have a right to insist that none of their taxes be used for religious purposes. More information: Legal Momentum: Supreme Court Dossier: McConnell (PDF) Ted Olson One of the most prominent ultra-conservative lawyers in Washington, D.C., Olson is known for his right-wing views on affirmative action and other civil rights issues. During his legal career, he unsuccessfully defended both the Virginia Military Institute's decision to exclude women despite its state funding and the Colorado initiative that would have barred cities and towns from passing statutes to bar discrimination based on sexual orientation. He won the case Hopwood v Texas, which overturned affirmative action admission policies for the University of Texas Law School. Olson has served on the boards of various right-wing foundations and think tanks, including the Washington Legal Foundation, a public interest law firm with an ultra-conservative and free-market emphasis, and the Independent Women's Forum. Olson also was the head of the Washington D.C. chapter of the right-wing Federalist Society. Having argued the Supreme Court case of Bush v. Gore that essentially decided the presidential election in his client's favor, Olson was subsequently nominated by President Bush to serve as Solicitor General. Given his professional record, there was much concern over Olson's nomination and he managed to make it out of the Senate Judiciary Committee by default, after a 9-9 party line vote. Olson was barely confirmed by the full Senate, 51-47. He has no judicial experience. Biographical information: More information: Legal Momentum: The Future of the Supreme Court | PDF version Judge Xavier Rodriguez There is limited information about the record of Judge Rodriguez, who served briefly on the Texas Supreme Court before being appointed to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas by George W. Bush. Before stepping down from the Texas Supreme Court in November, 2002, Rodriguez wrote an opinion in which the court granted a pregnant minor's request to have an abortion with notifying her parents. Of ten such appeals the court had heard, this was only the second time a lower court's denial of such a bypass had been reversed. Rodriguez, writing for the majority of seven judges, cited evidence that notification might lead to physical or emotional abuse of the girl. Biographical information: Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson Fourth Circuit Chief Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson of Virginia has demonstrated a clear and strident hostility toward the civil rights of minorities and criminal defendants and has a highly questionable record in other areas, including women's reproductive rights and worker protections. He has also shown himself to be a strong proponent of the "new federalism" that has served to gut federal protections in a variety of areas in the name of "states' rights." Moreover, Wilkinson's role in assisting Senators Helms and Thurmond's efforts to block President Clinton's African-American nominees to the Fourth Circuit raises concerns about his partisanship. Biographical information: More information: Legal Momentum: The Future of the Supreme Court | PDF version |
Copyright 1995-2009, All rights reserved. Permission granted for non-commercial use. National Organization for Women
(This was printed from http://www.now.org/issues/judicial/supreme/potentialnominees.html)