Yeah! George Bush chose NOT to pander to the hyper-sensitive calling for a SCOTUS nominee based on skin or sex preferences. Instead he picked the BEST person for the job. From everything I've read so far John Roberts Jr. sounds quite brilliant. He's won 25 out of 39 Supreme Court cases earning him one of (if not the best) records before the SCOTUS. A top notch legal mind who has no desire to legislate from the bench, who is an originialist. No chance he'll be bringing in international law or European opinions for his decisions. I've no doubt that he'll be confirmed. The fact that he won't legislate from the bench should make Democrats happy. It means he won't actively be trying to reverse Roe. V. Wade since it currently is the law of the land. However, I do believe if homosexual marriage came before him he would vote against it since he wouldn't see a "right" to it in the Constitution. The Democrats couldn't get a better candidate from Bush than this since Bush would be flayed mercilessly by his constituency if he nominated someone without solid conservative street creds. I read on Wikipedia that he has written 40 opinions while on the DC Court of Appeals with only two dissents. I don't know enough about the ins and outs within the Courts of Appeal, but that sounds like his judgments are so logical and consistent with the law that they leave no room for dissent. That's impressive!
No comments:
Post a Comment