Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Naral's old fact sheet on John Roberts included the statements below:

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 07:04 PM
Original message
Naral's old fact sheet on John Roberts included the statements below:
Edited on Tue Jul-19-05 07:04 PM by papau
NARAL: REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM & CHOICE JUNE 2001
John G. Roberts, Jr.
Previously nominated by President George Bush to the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, 1992.
Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States, 1989-93.

"The Court was so accustomed to the Solicitor General and the Deputy Solicitor General arguing for the overturn of Roe that during John Roberts¡¦ oral argument before the Supreme Court in Bray, a Justice asked, ¡§Mr. Roberts, in this case are you asking that Roe v. Wade be overruled?¡¨ He responded, ¡§No, your honor, the issue doesn¡¦t even come up.¡¨ To this the justice said, ¡§Well that hasn¡¦t prevented the Solicitor General from taking that position in prior cases.¡¨Transcript of Oral Argument of John Roberts, Jr., dated Oct. 16, 1991, Bray v. Alexandria Women¡¦s Health Clinic, 506 U.S. 263 (1993) (No. 90-985).

As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts argued in a brief before the U.S. Supreme Court (in a case that did not implicate Roe v. Wade) that ¡§e continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled¡K. he Court¡¦s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion¡K finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.¡¨Brief for the Respondent at 13, Rust v. Sullivan, 500 U.S. 173 (1991) (Nos. 89-1391, 89-1392).
In Rust v. Sullivan -500 U.S. 173 (19917), the Supreme Court considered whether Department of Health and Human Services regulations limiting the ability of Title X recipients to engage in abortion-related activities violated various constitutional provisions. Roberts, appearing on behalf of HHS as Deputy Solicitor General, argued that this domestic gag rule did not violate constitutional protections.ƒnRoberts, again as Deputy Solicitor General, argued as amicus curiae for the United States supporting Operation Rescue and six other individuals who routinely blocked access to reproductive health care clinics, arguing that the
protesters¡¦ behavior did not amount to discrimination against women even though only women could exercise the right to seek an abortion. Intervening as amicus is a wholly discretionary decision on the part of the Solicitor General. Here the government chose to involve itself in a case in support of those who sought to deprive women of the right to choose. Roberts argued that the protesters¡¦ blockade and protests merely amounted to an expression of their opposition to abortion and that a civil rights remedy was therefore inappropriate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. So . . .Roberts is a MOTHER FUCKER
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcctatas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. As if we should have expected anything less from W...
I can just see him when he made his decision..."hee hee, this will really piss the democrats off, fuck' em, God is on my side. My fundie base will just love this, maybe make em forget that I underfunded my Faith based initiatives that I promised them...betcha daddy wouldn't have picked Roberts...Well fuck him too.":grr:
Or something along those lines:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Bushie is so damned predictable
he is short sighted and lives in a fantasy world of his own creation.

I doubt that he even knows any normal people -- those who are well rooted in the REAL world. He is surround by people who only tell him what he wants to hear and he is protected from any opposing view.

So he probably thinks that Roberts is mainstream -- and he is NOT.

Issue one -- environment

Issue two -- women's reproductive CHOICE -- and probably all other aspects of the constitution and Bill of Rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zen Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. Read this lead article on Roberts from MSNBC and the purpose is there.
WASHINGTON - President Bush chose federal appeals court judge John G. Roberts Jr. on Tuesday as his first nominee for the Supreme Court, selecting a rock-solid conservative whose nomination could trigger a tumultuous battle over the direction of the nation’s highest court, senior administration officials said.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Jacobin Donating Member (820 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 08:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. CNN is already backing him
Just listening to those pukes talking about how likely he is to be nominated makes me sick. I had to turn it off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 06:18 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC