|
Melanie Hunter, CNSNews.com
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
A group of Republican congressmen are calling on Supreme Court Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg to recuse herself from abortion cases because of
her close ties to NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund.
In a letter to Ginsburg, Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa., and 12 other
Republicans, including Reps. Dave Weldon and Sue Myrick, pointed to a
report on the Los Angeles Times on March 11 that said "in January,
Ginsburg gave opening remarks for the fourth installment in the
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Distinguished Lecture Series on Women and
the Law."
"Two weeks earlier," the paper reported, "she had voted in a medical
screening case and taken the side promoted by the legal defense fund
in its friend-of-the-court brief."
"It is well known that NOW Legal Defense engages in active lobbying on
behalf of pro-abortion activists and regularly submits briefs to the
Supreme Court in a variety of cases," the congressmen wrote to
Ginsburg. "As a matter of fact, an entire section of the NOW Legal
Defense website is dedicate [sic] to cases that are heard before the
High Court. <snip>
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/3/23/113141.shtml
------------------------------------------
IMHO having strong views on an issue is not the same as being friends
with one of the principals in a case ala scalia and cheney.
|
| |
| |
In article <gf2160phc7se73sf83niggnhke1fa2kujf@4ax.com>,
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend <> wrote:
Melanie Hunter, CNSNews.com
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
A group of Republican congressmen are calling on Supreme Court Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg to recuse herself from abortion cases because of
her close ties to NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund.
In a letter to Ginsburg, Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa., and 12 other
Republicans, including Reps. Dave Weldon and Sue Myrick, pointed to a
report on the Los Angeles Times on March 11 that said "in January,
Ginsburg gave opening remarks for the fourth installment in the
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Distinguished Lecture Series on Women and
the Law."
"Two weeks earlier," the paper reported, "she had voted in a medical
screening case and taken the side promoted by the legal defense fund
in its friend-of-the-court brief."
"It is well known that NOW Legal Defense engages in active lobbying on
behalf of pro-abortion activists and regularly submits briefs to the
Supreme Court in a variety of cases," the congressmen wrote to
Ginsburg. "As a matter of fact, an entire section of the NOW Legal
Defense website is dedicate [sic] to cases that are heard before the
High Court. <snip>
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/3/23/113141.shtml
------------------------------------------
IMHO having strong views on an issue is not the same as being friends
with one of the principals in a case ala scalia and cheney.
True, but if judges were to recuse themselves because they have
strong views on major social issues, no judge would ever be able
to hear a case involving any of those issues.
|
| |
| |
In article <gf2160phc7se73sf83niggnhke1fa2kujf@4ax.com>, Laura Bush
murdered her boy friend <> says...
Melanie Hunter, CNSNews.com
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
A group of Republican congressmen are calling on Supreme Court Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg to recuse herself from abortion cases because of
her close ties to NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund.
But all she is doing is speaking at some of their events. Others including
Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas frequently speak at republican fund raisers
and express their opinions on a variety of political and religious matters.
Should they recuse themselves in all religious cases because they've
expressed dogmatic religious position? During Bush v. Gore, many of the
justices had vested interests in one party or another winning. The entire
court would have had to recuse themselves on those grounds. Holding a
general opinion about something does not exclude a justice from fairly
hearing a case. If, like Scalia, they announce how they will rule in a
particular case, before even hearing evidence, then that certainly is
grounds for recusal. However Ginsburg hasn't done anything like that.
--
____________________________________________________
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
|
| |
| |
|
