Nomination Nation

News, views, and gossip about judicial appointments. Please send your tips to Pozinski [at] gmail [dot] com or Senator [dot] Spectator [at] gmail [dot] com.

Friday, September 24, 2004

I can't believe this guy was Counsel to Prez

[Editor's Note: It appears that Dr. Grishka is referring to the column by John W. Dean referenced in Borked's post immediately below. Dean was White House Counsel to President Richard M. Nixon.]

Dean is getting demented. Just some of the errors in his post. First off, Reagan campaigned in 1980 and 84 not 82 and 86. Second, Roe was a 7-2 vote (White and Rehnquist dissented), not a 6-3.

Next, Kerry may not have talked much about his likely SCOTUS choices, but he has a 20 year voting history on Supreme Court nominees.

Yea-Breyer, Ginsburg, Scalia (no Nays were cast), Kennedy (no Nays); Nay-Souter (one of only 9 Nays), Thomas, Bork, Rehnquist (for CJ). The Kennedy-Scalia votes are not all that indicative because they were unanimous. The Souter-Rehnquist vote is more telling because he voted against promoting a highly qualified Justice to CJ, and against a very moderate judge whom he viewed as "too conservative."

Then of course, Dean goes on blabbing about 5 Justices selecting Bush. What nonsense. First of all, 7 justices agreed to reverse Florida's SC. Next, it continues to baffle me why a 5-4 (even if it was 5-4 and not 7-2) decision of SCOTUS is bad, while 4-3 SCOFLA (by an all-Democrat court) is good.

Look, being a political and a judicial junkie myself, I understand the importance of Presidential election to the development of the law. I also understand why partisans would want to spin facts their way. But please, before spinning anything, let's at least get the facts right.

Powered by Blogger