NOM BLOG

Ed Whelan: On Appointing Judges, I have "By Far The Greatest Confidence in Santorum"

 

Legal Scholar Ed Whelan at NRO's Bench Memos blog:

There are plenty of factors that any voter needs to sort out in deciding whom to support for president. For me, one very important factor is which candidate is most likely to nominate excellent Supreme Court justices and lower-court judges and to work tenaciously to get them confirmed. On this score, the candidate in whom I have by far the greatest confidence is Rick Santorum.

I know Rick not only from his work as a senator but from his four-plus years as a colleague of mine at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. (Rick disaffiliated from EPPC just before he launched his presidential campaign.) Rick is deeply committed to the battle against liberal judicial activism, and I’d be delighted to have him making judicial nominations.

4 Comments

  1. Barb Chamberlan
    Posted January 4, 2012 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

    NObama has already nominated (and they've been confirmed) two Justices, Kagan and Sotomayor. They are his clones.

    It's quite likely that the next president will have the opportunity to nominate at least two more. The legal ramifications of this will continue for decades after the next president's term is over.

    The casual voter must realize that NObama must not be re-elected unless we want more of his clones on SCOTUS for the next several decades.

  2. j. fox
    Posted January 4, 2012 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

    Rick eloquently spoke about the consequences of SSM, man on child and man on dog marriage.

  3. Louis E.
    Posted January 4, 2012 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    I am "liberal" on abortion rights and "conservative" on homosexuality,and I see both anti-abortionism and "gay rights" based on the shameless assertion of false "equalities".I want judges who will see through those phony arguments and strike them down.

  4. Bobby
    Posted January 4, 2012 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

    If Santorum appoints judges based on their religious views, then it's his goal to appoint "activist judges". If he didn't want activist judges who rule based on personal and religious views rather than on an impartial view of the law, then he wouldn't care about their religious views. Activism goes both ways.