Blog Archives
McDonnell and Cuccinelli Pleased with 4th Circuit Court Decision
Yesterday, the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Virginia’s Partial Birth Abortion Ban was constitutional. Former Attorney General and now, candidate for Governor, Bob McDonnell had played an instrumental role in this decision, as he was the first to secure this appeal before the Fourth Circuit. Ken Cuccinelli had voted in the State Senate to override the veto of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban.
McDonnell’s statement on the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision:
“I am pleased that the full U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld Virginia’s Partial-Birth Infanticide Ban. Virginia’s ban was passed by the General Assembly with bipartisan support. The law reflects the will of the people of the Commonwealth and is substantially similar to the federal ban on the procedure which was ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. I congratulate Attorney General Bill Mims for his successful handling of this appeal.”
Cuccinelli’s statement on the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision:
“Today’s ruling marks a major victory in a hard fought, six-year battle to end Partial Birth Abortion in Virginia. I want to extend both my appreciation and congratulations to Attorney General Bill Mims, Former Attorney General Bob McDonnell and their teams for their hard work in making today’s ruling a reality.”
Senator Cuccinelli noted that Steve Shannon, Democrat Candidate for Attorney General, refused to take a position on this issue in last week’s Virginia Bar Association Debate. During their debate, prior to the Courts ruling, Senator Cuccinelli declared that if Virginia lost the case he would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. Senator Cuccinelli asked Delegate Shannon if Shannon would also appeal if Virginia lost and Shannon refused to answer.
Steve Shannon ducked the question – leaving yet another issue on the table at last Saturday’s Debate that he refused to take a position on. Ken Cuccinelli however clearly stated that he would continue in the footsteps of our past four Attorneys General in defending Virginia’s ban on Partial Birth Abortion. …”
Obama Nominates Sonia Sotomayor to Supreme Court
President Obama announced today that he will be appointing Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. With Sotomayor’s nomination, there has been a flurry of questions surrounding her nomination, including lots of dissent. Will she be an activist judge or a judge that seeks to uphold the Constitution?
Let’s look at some recent statements that might lend some light into her view of interpreting the law from a speech that she made to La Raza in October 2001.
“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion [as a judge] than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
From a Duke University panel discussion in February 2005.
“All of the legal defense funds out there, they’re looking for people with Court of Appeals experience. Because it is — Court of Appeals is where policy is made. And I know, and I know, that this is on tape, and I should never say that. Because we don’t ‘make law,’ I know. [Laughter from audience] Okay, I know. I know. I’m not promoting it, and I’m not advocating it. I’m, you know. [More laughter] Having said that, the Court of Appeals is where, before the Supreme Court makes the final decision, the law is percolating. Its interpretation, its application.
Jeffrey Rosen of The New Republic even discussed why Sotomayor might not be a good choice for this position. While many law clerks praised her work, there were a few who cited that she often made oversight onto particular details involving some high-profile cases.
Some former clerks and prosecutors expressed concerns about her command of technical legal details: In 2001, for example, a conservative colleague, Ralph Winter, included an unusual footnote in a case suggesting that an earlier opinion by Sotomayor might have inadvertently misstated the law in a way that misled litigants. The most controversial case in which Sotomayor participated is Ricci v. DeStefano, the explosive case involving affirmative action in the New Haven fire department, which is now being reviewed by the Supreme Court. A panel including Sotomayor ruled against the firefighters in a perfunctory unpublished opinion. This provoked Judge Cabranes, a fellow Clinton appointee, to object to the panel’s opinion that contained “no reference whatsoever to the constitutional issues at the core of this case.” (The extent of Sotomayor’s involvement in the opinion itself is not publicly known.)
I thought Obama was seeking someone with a strong judicial background. I guess strong judicial background is someone who thinks the Courtrooms of America establish policy. Someone better inform Congress that they are out of business if this is the case.
Supreme Court Justice Souter to Retire
NPR reports that Supreme Court Justice David Souter will be retiring at the end of the court term. This will be President Obama’s first court appointment, and no doubt, this opens the door for a potential appointment of Elena Kagan, who has been rumored to be one of Obama’s top choices. No doubt, whoever it is, the nominee will most likely have a cloud of controversy over him/her.
Stay tuned for future developments.
