- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Messages
- 4,731
HAS IT BEGUN? WITH MIERS NOMINATION HISTORY, RELIGIOUS RIGHT
DEMANDING EXTREMIST JUSTICES FOR SUPREME COURT
State-Church Separation, Abortion Rights & Civil Liberties Could Hang
On Bush Announcement For SCOTUS Positions
Has it begun?
When Chief Justice William Rehnquist died and Justice Sandra Day
O'Connor announced her resignation, the entire ideological complexion
of the nation's highest court -- and the fate of key decisions
touching on everything from the First Amendment to the right to
privacy -- hung in the balance. President Bush had the opportunity to
begin appointing "solid conservatives" who would re-shape the face of
American law, overturn and reverse decades of Supreme Court decisions,
and transform the American judicial system.
For the religious right, including millions of evangelicals and
fundamentalists, it was an unprecedented opportunity.
And so far, it has not happened.
First, Bush selected John Roberts as Chief Justice of the high court.
Roberts proved to be a "Teflon" nominee and was difficult to pin down
regarding how he might rule in critical cases. His legal credentials
proved sufficient to win him approval in the Senate.
Then came Harriet Miers, a Texas legal eagle who was a White House
insider and someone considered a reliable Bush confidant. The paper
trail on how Miers viewed contentious issues like abortion and gay
rights proved confusing, and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle
divided over her fitness to sit on the Supreme Court. Religious
conservatives in particular were disappointed with the Miers
selection. Karl Rove burned the midnight oil reaching out to
evangelical leaders like James Dobson, head of the influential "Focus
on the Family" group touting Miers as a theologically reliable
candidate. And despite Bush's obscurantist claim that there was "no
litmus test" when it came to vetting Supreme Court candidates, the
White House was blunt in broadcasting Miers' membership in a
hard-shell Protestant church along with the dramatic story of her
sojourn from Roman Catholicism to evangelical Christianity.
She was a modern-day Paul on the road to Damascus.
Unlike Roberts however, there was enough paper-trail to alarm many
religious and social conservatives. Miers was not sufficient
anti-gay, once spoke about privacy rights in the context of abortion,
and had not definitively staked out the ideological positions many
religious right groups were using as THEIR litmus test. On the right
there was open revolt by those who saw the Miers nomination as a
squandered opportunity. Why, they complained to the White House,
after decades of grooming a stable of more ideologically purified
candidates, many of them on the roster of groups like the Federalist
Society or the Christian Legal Society, not use this reservoir of
talent to fill the highest court in the land?
The Miers debacle has joined a growing list of problems facing the
Bush White House, including widening disenchantment with the war in
Iraq, the FEMA mismanagement of Hurricane Katrina relief efforts, and
the potentially explosive scandal involving political operative
"Scooter" Libby and presidential confidant Karl Rove.
"People are confused about him," an unidentified Bush associate told
the New York Post. "There's still a desire to like him, but there's
also a great deal of disappointment with him."
With many social and religious conservatives disenchanted over the
Miers nomination -- and sensing political opportunity in the wake of
her withdrawal -- Mr. Bush finds himself under pressure to nominate a
more ideologically reliable candidate, one with a proven track record
of decisions or explicit policy statements. White House strategists
are aware of the political reality and the fact that in the 2004
election, four of five white evangelicals voted for the president.
This amounted to nearly 35% of the Bush electoral base, and the
largest single demographic voting block supporting the Republicans.
Even so, the evangelicals and their religious right brethren are
frustrated. Through groups like the Christian Coalition (still a
political force to be considered), they control or have "substantial"
influence in nearly three-dozen state Republican organizations. They
enjoy a revolving door to the White House; access to the Bush
administration as demonstrated in the "Dobsongate" leaks from Karl
Rove; and they have developed into a sophisticated, politically-savvy
cultural and electoral force.
Despite this, much of their social agenda has yet to be implemented.
As the New York Times has noted, abortion remains broadly legal, gays
continue to make progress even on the touchy issue of same-sex
marriages, and devotional prayer and bible verse recitation in public
schools is banned under most circumstances. As pundit David Frum has
asked, "If the Christian Right is so well organized and powerful, why
does it nearly always lose?"
That sense of frustration means that politicized evangelicals and
others on the religious right will be playing hard-ball when it comes
to Mr. Bush's pick for the next Supreme Court nominee. News sources
suggest than announcement could come as early as tomorrow, and that
the President is likely to make his latest pick from a "short list"
drawn up prior to the Miers nomination.
Topping the list are federal appeals court judges Samuel Alioto and J.
Michael Luttwig, along with Karen Williams, Priscilla Owen and Alice
Batchelder. Also on the roster is Michigan Supreme Court Justice
Maura Corrigan.
The White House is also hoping for a relatively quick confirmation
procedure. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) told reporters
last week that he hopes confirmation hearings would be well underway
before Christmas.
Bush may find himself under pressure to reverse his policy of looking
outside the judiciary for potential nominees. Democrats and
Republicans seem to agree that someone with a proven track record of
legal opinions is preferable to the "what if" scenario that
characterized the Miers nomination. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) who
had expressed doubts about Miers told reporters that while experience
on the bench is not a requirement to sit on the Supreme Court,
"someone who is not at all versed in constitutional law, and who
didn't show a very quick ability to learn it would be in trouble."
Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network, an advocacy group
supporting Bush's picks for federal judgeships, agreed. "The best
predictor for future Supreme Court performance is prior court
performance."
Groups at both ends of the political spectrum will be waiting tomorrow
as Bush is expected to announce his nominee. That person will face
formidable vetting and grilling, and questions about how he or she
will vote in cases involving abortion, gay rights, state-church
separation and other issues. For the religious right, the selection
of the next Supreme Court justice must be a reward for years of
patient waiting, hard work supporting the Bush administration and the
Republican party, and yet-to-be-fulfilled promises that America will
be remade, truly, as "the Right nation,"
a nation under their god.
For further information:
http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/court40.htm
(Story, background on Miers nomination)
**
AMERICAN ATHEISTS, INC.
http://www.atheists.org
http://www.americanatheist.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 28, 2005
MIERS WITHDRAWAL NOT A GREEN LIGHT FOR
"ANOTHER SCALIA" ON SUPREME COURT SAYS ATHEIST GROUP
The sudden announcement that Harriet Miers is withdrawing from
consideration to a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court must not be an
excuse for the Bush administration to cave in to pressure and propose
a new nominee blessed by the nation's extreme religious right.
Miers was under pressure to prove that despite her evangelical
religious beliefs, she would meet the litmus test of religious groups
opposed to privacy, abortion and gay rights, and state-church
separation. Many religious right partisans want President Bush to
nominate a Supreme Court justice in the strident ideological mold of
Clarence Thomas.
"It frightening to think that even with what we did know about Harriet
Miers, she was not hard-line enough for some of these religious right
organizations that feel that they own the White House," said Ellen
Johnson, President of American Atheists.
"Despite all of the claptrap about not having a 'litmus test,' the
religious right has a long checklist of what Supreme Court decisions
they want overturned, and they want President Bush to name justices
who will do just that."
Dave Silverman, Communications Director for American Atheists said
that the final blow in the Miers nomination may have been disclosure
1993 speech where she spoke about "self-determination" when it came to
issues like school prayer, civil liberties and abortion and warned
against the temptation of "legislating religion or morality."
"We still can't be sure of where Miers stands on these issues today,
but for America's religious right, cautions about the government
legislating religion still unfortunately sound alarms in some quarters
of our society."
Silverman encouraged Mr. Bush to resist pressure from religious right
advocacy groups, and choose a "true conservative who doesn't want Big
Government telling us to pray, or make decisions for us about how we
live our lives."
AMERICAN ATHEISTS is a nationwide movement that defends civil rights
for Atheists; works for the total separation of church and state; and
addresses issues of First Amendment public policy.
**
DEMANDING EXTREMIST JUSTICES FOR SUPREME COURT
State-Church Separation, Abortion Rights & Civil Liberties Could Hang
On Bush Announcement For SCOTUS Positions
Has it begun?
When Chief Justice William Rehnquist died and Justice Sandra Day
O'Connor announced her resignation, the entire ideological complexion
of the nation's highest court -- and the fate of key decisions
touching on everything from the First Amendment to the right to
privacy -- hung in the balance. President Bush had the opportunity to
begin appointing "solid conservatives" who would re-shape the face of
American law, overturn and reverse decades of Supreme Court decisions,
and transform the American judicial system.
For the religious right, including millions of evangelicals and
fundamentalists, it was an unprecedented opportunity.
And so far, it has not happened.
First, Bush selected John Roberts as Chief Justice of the high court.
Roberts proved to be a "Teflon" nominee and was difficult to pin down
regarding how he might rule in critical cases. His legal credentials
proved sufficient to win him approval in the Senate.
Then came Harriet Miers, a Texas legal eagle who was a White House
insider and someone considered a reliable Bush confidant. The paper
trail on how Miers viewed contentious issues like abortion and gay
rights proved confusing, and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle
divided over her fitness to sit on the Supreme Court. Religious
conservatives in particular were disappointed with the Miers
selection. Karl Rove burned the midnight oil reaching out to
evangelical leaders like James Dobson, head of the influential "Focus
on the Family" group touting Miers as a theologically reliable
candidate. And despite Bush's obscurantist claim that there was "no
litmus test" when it came to vetting Supreme Court candidates, the
White House was blunt in broadcasting Miers' membership in a
hard-shell Protestant church along with the dramatic story of her
sojourn from Roman Catholicism to evangelical Christianity.
She was a modern-day Paul on the road to Damascus.
Unlike Roberts however, there was enough paper-trail to alarm many
religious and social conservatives. Miers was not sufficient
anti-gay, once spoke about privacy rights in the context of abortion,
and had not definitively staked out the ideological positions many
religious right groups were using as THEIR litmus test. On the right
there was open revolt by those who saw the Miers nomination as a
squandered opportunity. Why, they complained to the White House,
after decades of grooming a stable of more ideologically purified
candidates, many of them on the roster of groups like the Federalist
Society or the Christian Legal Society, not use this reservoir of
talent to fill the highest court in the land?
The Miers debacle has joined a growing list of problems facing the
Bush White House, including widening disenchantment with the war in
Iraq, the FEMA mismanagement of Hurricane Katrina relief efforts, and
the potentially explosive scandal involving political operative
"Scooter" Libby and presidential confidant Karl Rove.
"People are confused about him," an unidentified Bush associate told
the New York Post. "There's still a desire to like him, but there's
also a great deal of disappointment with him."
With many social and religious conservatives disenchanted over the
Miers nomination -- and sensing political opportunity in the wake of
her withdrawal -- Mr. Bush finds himself under pressure to nominate a
more ideologically reliable candidate, one with a proven track record
of decisions or explicit policy statements. White House strategists
are aware of the political reality and the fact that in the 2004
election, four of five white evangelicals voted for the president.
This amounted to nearly 35% of the Bush electoral base, and the
largest single demographic voting block supporting the Republicans.
Even so, the evangelicals and their religious right brethren are
frustrated. Through groups like the Christian Coalition (still a
political force to be considered), they control or have "substantial"
influence in nearly three-dozen state Republican organizations. They
enjoy a revolving door to the White House; access to the Bush
administration as demonstrated in the "Dobsongate" leaks from Karl
Rove; and they have developed into a sophisticated, politically-savvy
cultural and electoral force.
Despite this, much of their social agenda has yet to be implemented.
As the New York Times has noted, abortion remains broadly legal, gays
continue to make progress even on the touchy issue of same-sex
marriages, and devotional prayer and bible verse recitation in public
schools is banned under most circumstances. As pundit David Frum has
asked, "If the Christian Right is so well organized and powerful, why
does it nearly always lose?"
That sense of frustration means that politicized evangelicals and
others on the religious right will be playing hard-ball when it comes
to Mr. Bush's pick for the next Supreme Court nominee. News sources
suggest than announcement could come as early as tomorrow, and that
the President is likely to make his latest pick from a "short list"
drawn up prior to the Miers nomination.
Topping the list are federal appeals court judges Samuel Alioto and J.
Michael Luttwig, along with Karen Williams, Priscilla Owen and Alice
Batchelder. Also on the roster is Michigan Supreme Court Justice
Maura Corrigan.
The White House is also hoping for a relatively quick confirmation
procedure. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) told reporters
last week that he hopes confirmation hearings would be well underway
before Christmas.
Bush may find himself under pressure to reverse his policy of looking
outside the judiciary for potential nominees. Democrats and
Republicans seem to agree that someone with a proven track record of
legal opinions is preferable to the "what if" scenario that
characterized the Miers nomination. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) who
had expressed doubts about Miers told reporters that while experience
on the bench is not a requirement to sit on the Supreme Court,
"someone who is not at all versed in constitutional law, and who
didn't show a very quick ability to learn it would be in trouble."
Wendy Long of the Judicial Confirmation Network, an advocacy group
supporting Bush's picks for federal judgeships, agreed. "The best
predictor for future Supreme Court performance is prior court
performance."
Groups at both ends of the political spectrum will be waiting tomorrow
as Bush is expected to announce his nominee. That person will face
formidable vetting and grilling, and questions about how he or she
will vote in cases involving abortion, gay rights, state-church
separation and other issues. For the religious right, the selection
of the next Supreme Court justice must be a reward for years of
patient waiting, hard work supporting the Bush administration and the
Republican party, and yet-to-be-fulfilled promises that America will
be remade, truly, as "the Right nation,"
a nation under their god.
For further information:
http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/court40.htm
(Story, background on Miers nomination)
**
AMERICAN ATHEISTS, INC.
http://www.atheists.org
http://www.americanatheist.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 28, 2005
MIERS WITHDRAWAL NOT A GREEN LIGHT FOR
"ANOTHER SCALIA" ON SUPREME COURT SAYS ATHEIST GROUP
The sudden announcement that Harriet Miers is withdrawing from
consideration to a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court must not be an
excuse for the Bush administration to cave in to pressure and propose
a new nominee blessed by the nation's extreme religious right.
Miers was under pressure to prove that despite her evangelical
religious beliefs, she would meet the litmus test of religious groups
opposed to privacy, abortion and gay rights, and state-church
separation. Many religious right partisans want President Bush to
nominate a Supreme Court justice in the strident ideological mold of
Clarence Thomas.
"It frightening to think that even with what we did know about Harriet
Miers, she was not hard-line enough for some of these religious right
organizations that feel that they own the White House," said Ellen
Johnson, President of American Atheists.
"Despite all of the claptrap about not having a 'litmus test,' the
religious right has a long checklist of what Supreme Court decisions
they want overturned, and they want President Bush to name justices
who will do just that."
Dave Silverman, Communications Director for American Atheists said
that the final blow in the Miers nomination may have been disclosure
1993 speech where she spoke about "self-determination" when it came to
issues like school prayer, civil liberties and abortion and warned
against the temptation of "legislating religion or morality."
"We still can't be sure of where Miers stands on these issues today,
but for America's religious right, cautions about the government
legislating religion still unfortunately sound alarms in some quarters
of our society."
Silverman encouraged Mr. Bush to resist pressure from religious right
advocacy groups, and choose a "true conservative who doesn't want Big
Government telling us to pray, or make decisions for us about how we
live our lives."
AMERICAN ATHEISTS is a nationwide movement that defends civil rights
for Atheists; works for the total separation of church and state; and
addresses issues of First Amendment public policy.
**
