Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Supreme Court: Talking Points on the Nomination Process

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Kevin Spidel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 01:29 PM
Original message
Supreme Court: Talking Points on the Nomination Process
Original link: http://spidel.net/PHP-Nuke/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=74&mode=&order=0&thold=0

Friends,
As you have likely heard, President Bush will announce his nominee to the Supreme Court tonight at 9 p.m. Below please find the latest talking points from the Senate on the nomination process. All offices should please take the guidance of Senator Reid's office in talking about potential nominees and the President's choice, once that is announced.

We will continue to pass along information from the Senate via email. Thanks.

Talking Points on the Nomination Process:


The standards for a nominee are clear. A nominee must:

Protect the individual rights and freedoms of Americans,
Judge cases fairly , with an open mind, and without a political agenda,
Protect all Americans , and not side with powerful special interests, and
Meet the highest ethical standards and be free of conflicts of interest.
Justices must be committed to the independence of the Court, not an ideological agenda.

The next Supreme Court Justice will make decisions affecting the lives of all Americans. It is important that the decision whether to confirm a nominee be made with the best information possible.

We must not rush to judgment. The Judiciary Committee must be allowed to do its work, and that includes an in-depth review of the nominee and hearings to allow for questions and answers.

Justices are appointed for a lifetime . There is a process in place to evaluate a nominee's credentials and qualifications. That process must be allowed to occur.

As recent examples, such as the nomination of Bernard Kerik, have shown, it is important that we not rush to a decision before fully examining the facts.

It is the Senate's Constitutional duty to carefully consider nominees. Many justices serve for ten, twenty or more years and will have an enormous impact on the laws of our country. For a nomination decision, it is important to do it right, not to do it quickly.

Hearings are central to the nomination process. It is important not to prejudge a nominee before all the facts are in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kevin Spidel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 01:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. FYI - this is from the ouse Democrats office
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC