The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

20 May 2005

We got your mainstream right here

Wendy Long at NRO, picking up quotes from Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA):

Boxer declared that Justice [Priscilla] Owen has ruled on "a series of issues where she's hostile to the people." What Justice [Janice Rogers] Brown "wants to do to our lives and other peoples' lives" is "frightening," she said. To "use these two women nominees to say that the Republicans care about women, you know, is like saying that Clarence Thomas has ruled in favor of African Americans, when in fact he has been the leader on the opposite side."

Well, okay, but then there's this:

In her last election, Boxer was supported by 58% of the voters in California; California's other Senator, Diane Feinstein, won only 56% of the vote. Justice Brown was supported by 76% of Californians in her reelection to the California Supreme Court, and 84% of Texans voted in the last election for Justice Owen.

I should be so hostile.

What? Oh, that? Do I look like a Senator? (Don't answer that.)

Posted at 4:37 PM to Political Science Fiction

Do you think this is a fair comparison, considering most people are MORE concerned about who their Senators are, than whether a judge is retained. I usually just vote to retain the current judges unless there was something particularly bad about them. I put more consideration into my senate selections.

Maybe that's just me?

Posted by: bruce at 9:53 AM on 21 May 2005

It's not just you, and it's a fair point. California has a retention ballot, not too dissimilar from the one here; the tendency (and I have it too) is to retain a judge unless there's some compelling reason not to.

Still, the complaint about Justice Brown is that she's way out of line with California, and therefore presumably national, thinking; were that the case, you'd think she'd get more than 24 percent of Californians to vote against her retention.

Posted by: CGHill at 10:43 AM on 21 May 2005

And it's not as if California voters have never rejected a sitting Justice who was too far out of the mainstream.

Trouble is, she (then-Chief Justice Rose Bird) was way over to the Left -- closer, in fact, to Boxer than to Rogers Brown.

Posted by: McGehee at 11:49 AM on 21 May 2005

You know, I keep wondering why Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owen are not put on the TV talk-show circuit to at least explain their background and some of their writings. I would think this would help gain more support for them and make the Dems look even more stupid.

Or is not doing this one of those hallowed "Senate Traditions" that should not go the way of the 8-track tape?

Posted by: Brad S at 12:14 PM on 21 May 2005

In this day and age, its not unreasonable to assume that unless some interest groups takes an interest in announcing the views of a particular candidate they can fly under the radar, judges, more likely than other positions.

Still, the "something has to be done!" rhetoric seems so carefully staged as to be ridiculous. The venerable question "why now?" seems appropriate.

Posted by: bruce at 10:17 PM on 21 May 2005