Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Alberto Gonzales v. Priscilla Owen

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
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:06 AM
Original message
Alberto Gonzales v. Priscilla Owen
Alberto Gonzales v. Priscilla Owen
For Immediate Release: 7/22/2002
Alberto Gonzales criticism of Priscilla Owen on the Texas Supreme Court bench covers her right-wing judicial activism on a wide range of issues

As White House Counsel and spokesman for the Bush administrations legal policy, Alberto Gonzales has, not surprisingly, defended the nomination of Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen to the Fifth Circuit, claiming that she is "superbly qualified" and minimizing their differences when both served on the state supreme court. Measured by their opinions when they were both on the court, however, Gonzales view was very different just a few years ago.

Although they served together for a relatively short time in 1999-2000, Gonzales wrote or joined more than ten opinions sharply criticizing opinions written or joined by Owen on the court. In most of these cases, Gonzales, a strong conservative on the court, was part of the majority that rejected ultra-conservative Owen dissents as ignoring the plain meaning of the law or otherwise engaging in improper judicial activism to try to reach a particular result. In what could be a close vote by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Owens nomination, the decisive factor could be the concern that Owen has allowed her ideology to get in the way of her responsibilities as a judge.

As illustrated by the specific examples below concerning reproductive choice, consumer rights, employee rights, environmental concerns, and other issues, Gonzales own written opinions demonstrate that, contrary to President Bushs asserted objective, Owen would seek to make the law, not interpret it, from the federal bench.

Gonzales opinions criticizing Owen dissents on reproductive rights In re Jane Doe 1(II), 19 S.W.3d 346 (Tex. 2000)...In fact, Gonzales specifically wrote that adopting the dissenters narrow view "would be an unconscionable act of judicial activism." Id. at 366 (emphasis added).


Priscilla Owens or Janice Rogers-Brown are my deepest fears for the nomination. Especially considering the angle of replacing O'Connor with another female justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Fovea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
1. Screw the compromise
Filibuster now!

If they break the filibuster, when we take back congress in 06 and the whitehouse in 08, we will screw them hard.
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 Jul 21st 2017, 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

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

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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