AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Democratic National Committee News

Dean: Judging From McCain's Judges, He's the Wrong Choice for America's Future

WASHINGTON, May 6 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — After weeks of pretending to be "a different kind of Republican," John McCain showed his true colors today in his speech about the kind of judges he would appoint as president. While he makes a show of trying to recast himself as a "moderate" for the general election, in reality John McCain is promising four more years of right wing judges bent on pushing a radical agenda from the bench. In fact, in his 22 years as a Republican Senator, John McCain has never voted against a single judicial nomination by a Republican President. No matter how far outside the mainstream they have been, John McCain has been a loyal rubberstamp for their radical right wing agenda.

The following is a statement from Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean responding to John McCain's right wing judicial philosophy:

"As John McCain said today, our next president will make hundreds of judicial nominees with far-reaching consequences for the future of our country. Given John McCain's radical, right wing judicial philosophy, it's clear he's the wrong choice to safeguard that future. No matter how far they have gone to restrict our fundamental rights or their clear records of gutting the reforms John McCain claims to care about, he has put loyalty to his party and a radical agenda ahead of the American people. When voters see John McCain's real record, they are not going to elect a radical rubberstamp who voted for every one of President Bush's activist judges and promises hundreds more just like them."

JUDGING MCCAIN'S JUDGES

2000: McCain Secretly Promised Pro-Life Judicial Litmus Test, While Bush Would Not Make Similar Guarantee. "Somewhat surprisingly, McCain had the support of Gary Bauer, the social conservative, who had dropped out of the race by that time," reported the New Yorker. Bauer explained: "I wanted a commitment from either George Bush or John McCain that if elected he would appoint pro-life judges to the Supreme Court...Bush said he had no litmus test, and his judges would be strict constructionists. But McCain, in private, assured me he would appoint pro-life judges." [New Yorker, 5/30/05]

McCain Ran to the Right of Bush On Judicial Litmus Test. "In 2000, when McCain last ran for president - which is what he is doing now - he earned the support of Gary Bauer, a conservative Christian, because he promised Bauer he would 'appoint pro-life judges.' This, Bauer told The New Yorker, was further than George Bush was willing to go at the time. [Washington Post, 5/16/06]

Environmentalists Wary of McCain's Appointments To The Supreme Court. Joseph Romm, former top Energy Department efficiency and renewable energy official said that environmentalists worry that McCain's appointments to the Supreme Court would be extremely conservative. They worry that conservative judges "would overturn last year's landmark 5-4 ruling — in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency — that the EPA has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide under existing laws. 'We will have a devil of a time getting serious action on global warming if the Supreme Court reverses its position,' says Romm." [Business Week Online, 4/22/08]

McCain Praised Alito And Roberts As Two Of The Greatest Justices In Court's History. The East Valley Tribune reported that "Furthermore, he commended President Bush's nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the high court, calling them 'two of the greatest' justices in its history. Both sided with the majority in the abortion case. McCain said he would appoint similar candidates — those who would strictly interpret the U.S. Constitution and who wouldn't legislate from the bench." [East Valley Tribune, 4/29/2007]

— Roberts Wrote That Roe V Wade Was \"Wrongly Decided And Should Be Overturned.\" In 1990 while serving as the Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts coauthored a brief in the case of Rust v. Sullivan, \"[w]e continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled . . . [T]he Court's conclusion [] in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion . . . find[s] no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.\" [Brief for the Respondent, Rust v. Sullivan, 1989 U.S. Briefs 1391 (1990)] — Roberts Would Have Taken Position That Would Have Deprived American Soldiers Tortured in Iraq from Seeking Restitution. The case of Acree v. Republic of Iraq was filed under the terrorism exception to the Foreign Soverign Immunities Act by seventeen American soldiers who had been captured and tortured during the Gulf War. The district court had decided in favor of the plaintiffs, but the government contended that the court did not have jurisdiction due to federal law. Two of the judges on the panel, Harry Edwards and David Tatel, rejected the government's argument, but Roberts, however, would have adopted the position of the government that federal law \"deprived the courts of jurisdiction over suits against Iraq\" for damages resulting from torture and other terrorist acts. The result would have been to deprive Americans tortured in Iraq of any possible relief in federal court. [Acree v. Republic of Iraq, 370 F.3d 41 (D.C. Cir. 2004)] — Alito Would Require Women To Notify Husbands Before Exercising Her Reproductive Rights. Alito wrote a troubling opinion concerning reproductive rights in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey. The Third Circuit in Casey upheld a number of the provisions in the restrictive abortion law enacted by Pennsylvania in the late 1980's, in an opinion that questioned Roe v. Wade. But the Third Circuit struck down the law's requirement that women notify their spouses before having an abortion. Alito dissented because he would have gone even further than the rest of the court and would have upheld the spousal notification requirement. [Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 947 F.3d 682 (3d Cir. 1991), aff'd in part, rev'd in part 505 U.S. 833 (1992); Washington Times, 10/29/1991]

McCain Was Key Negotiator In Deal That Lead To Confirmations Of Ultra-Conservative Judges Owen, Brown and Pryor. "The deal, which was finalized in McCain's office after a weekend of back-and-forth discussions between Byrd and Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), would put an end to three filibusters and allow votes on three appellate court nominees: Owen, Janice Rogers Brown and William Pryor." [Chicago Tribune, 5/24/2005]

— Pryor Called Abortions \"An Abomination\" And Said Overturning Sodomy Laws Would Lead To \"Necrophilia\" And \"Pedophilia.\" \"But he scandalized many Democrats and proponents of a centrist Supreme Court by calling the 1973 Roe decision legalizing abortions nationwide an abomination. He has also said that when the Supreme Court overturned state sodomy laws used against gays, it gave the green light to 'necrophilia' and even 'pedophilia' so long as the child was deemed 'willing.'\" [Chicago Tribune, 5/1/2005] — Even Alberto Gonzalez Blasted Owen's \"Unconscionable Act Of Judicial Activism.\" \"Owen's opponents have made much over her opinion in a 2000 case involving a Texas law that requires girls to notify their parents before they have an abortion, unless a court finds she's 'sufficiently well-informed' and 'mature.' .Of Owen's dissent, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who was then on the court, wrote that 'to create hurdles that simply are not to be found in the words of the statute would be an unconscionable act of judicial activism.'\" [St. Petersburg Times, 5/22/05] — Brown Bashed Federal Regulatory Efforts, Called New Deal Economic Regulations A \"Socialist Revolution.\" \"In speeches to conservative groups, she has described a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding New Deal economic regulation as 'the triumph of our own socialist revolution;' has declared that when government moves in, 'the result is families under siege, war in the streets ... and the triumph of deceit;' and has said senior citizens 'blithely cannibalize their grandchildren' for government benefits. Opponents say Brown's condemnation of government is especially troubling because the court to which she has been nominated by Bush, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., hears more cases involving federal regulations than any other.\" [San Francisco Chronicle, 5/18/05]

McCain Even Backed Bork, Who Criticized "One Man, One Vote" As Counter to the Fourteenth Amendment. In 1971, he said that "the principle of 'one man, one vote' runs counter to the text of the Fourteenth Amendment, the history surrounding its adoption and ratification, and the political practice of Americans from colonial times up to the day the court invented the new formula."" [Washington Post, 7/2/1987]

— McCain Voted To Confirm Bork As An Associate Justice Of The Supreme Court. McCain supported the confirmation of the nomination of Robert H. Bork to be an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. [1987 Senate Vote 348, 10/23/1987]

Paid for and authorized by the Democratic National Committee, www.democrats.org.

This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

SOURCE Democratic National Committee

Send this news item to a friend.

Print This Page

Search Our News Using Google Search

Can't find what you want? Try using Google:

Google