It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Journalists on 'Red Alert' for SCOTUS Nominee (9 PM?)

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 11:17 AM
link   
According to some sources, a Presidential nominee for the Supreme Court of the United States could be named at any time later today or early tomorrow. The nominee will replace the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor and is expected now to be a woman, perhaps one of the two Ediths that are presently sitting on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.



[edit on 7/19/2005 by djohnsto77]




posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 11:55 AM
link   
According to the Associated Press (via FOX News) the President will be making an annoucement at 9 PM tonight regarding the Supreme Court.

Brace yourselves!



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 12:44 PM
link   
Woo. I look forward to it.

Link from yahoo



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 03:51 PM
link   
It's gonna be Mr. T. I just know it. It must be, how could it be anyone else?





posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Just a little FYI on the ladies' profiles:

Judge Edith Brown Clement has stated that the Supreme Court “has clearly held that the right to privacy guaranteed by the Constitution includes the right to have an abortion” and that “the law is settled in that regard.”

However:
Notable opinions:
A majority opinion in Vogler v. Blackmore, 352 F.3d 150 (5th Cir. 2003), reducing a jury verdict for pain and suffering damages to the estates of a mother and three-year old daughter killed when an eighteen-wheel tractor trailer crossed the highway center-line and ran over their car. The damages to the mother were reduced from $200,000 to $30,000 and the pain and suffering award for the daughter was eliminated entirely based on the lack of specific evidence about the daughter's "awareness of the impending collision."

Ugh!



Edith Hollan Jones, on the other hand is, "naturally, anti-choice as well, including:

A majority opinion in Barnes v. Mississippi, 992 F.2d 1335 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 976 (1993), holding that a Mississippi abortion statute that prohibited unemancipated minors from obtaining an abortion without the consent of both parents did not unduly burden the right to seek an abortion in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Both parents, mind you. BOTH. It's also worth noting that she started her career in law at Andrews Kurth - a name that should live by now in infamy for its ties to the Bush family and Enron."

Ack!


Talk about lesser of two evils!! I've got my fingers hesitantly crossed for Clement, I guess.


[edit on 19-7-2005 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 06:43 PM
link   
MSNBC is reporting Breaking news that


Source: Bush has picked John C. Roberts Jr. as his high court nominee.
AP: Appellate court judge Roberts is Bush pick



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Uh, boy! This guy sounds like a real charmer.


In the unanimous ruling last October in Hedgepeth v. WMATA, Roberts upheld the arrest, handcuffing and detention of a 12-year-old girl for eating a single french fry inside a D.C. Metrorail station. "No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation," Roberts acknowledged in the decision, but he ruled that nothing the police did violated the girl's Fourth Amendment or Fifth Amendment rights.
...
In another decision last June, Roberts went even further than his colleagues in supporting the Bush administration in a case that pitted the government against veterans of the first Gulf War. American soldiers captured and tortured by the Iraqi government during the first Gulf War sued the Iraqi government in U.S. court and won nearly $1 billion in damages at the district court level.

But once Saddam was toppled in 2003, the Bush administration wanted to protect the new Iraqi government from liability and intervened to block the award. Roberts, alone among the circuit judges who ruled with the government, said the federal courts did not even have jurisdiction to consider the victims' claim. An appeal is before the Supreme Court.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 08:55 PM
link   
I just put it up on ATSNN: www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Uh, boy! This guy sounds like a real charmer.


In the unanimous ruling last October in Hedgepeth v. WMATA, Roberts upheld the arrest, handcuffing and detention of a 12-year-old girl for eating a single french fry inside a D.C. Metrorail station. "No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation," Roberts acknowledged in the decision, but he ruled that nothing the police did violated the girl's Fourth Amendment or Fifth Amendment rights.
...
In another decision last June, Roberts went even further than his colleagues in supporting the Bush administration in a case that pitted the government against veterans of the first Gulf War. American soldiers captured and tortured by the Iraqi government during the first Gulf War sued the Iraqi government in U.S. court and won nearly $1 billion in damages at the district court level.

But once Saddam was toppled in 2003, the Bush administration wanted to protect the new Iraqi government from liability and intervened to block the award. Roberts, alone among the circuit judges who ruled with the government, said the federal courts did not even have jurisdiction to consider the victims' claim. An appeal is before the Supreme Court.



Sounds bought to me.




top topics



 
0

log in

join