May 12, 2005

for your magazine...

For a bit of ammunition in upcoming arguments, you might want to note this post, by PowerLine, in which they refute the oft-repeated line that:

...As a colleague on the Texas Supreme Court, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales once criticized Owen for an "unconscionable act of judicial activism" by restricting a minor's access to abortion...

Owens' dissent in the Jane Doe case was based purely on questions of appellate procedure. Gonzales' criticism was obviously aimed at a different judge's dissent that hinged on interpretation of the law...

Also good ammo to have on hand:

Ed Whelan, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, responds on NRO to one of the liberals' pet arguments about the law --that those who reject the liberal version of a "living constitution" would not have reached the correct result in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court decision that declared segregated public schools unlawful. As Whelan notes, Michael McConnell, now a court of appeals judge, refuted that argument ten years ago. Whelan demonstrates that current attempts to revive it are wrong in all particulars...
Posted by John Weidner at May 12, 2005 7:12 AM
Weblog by John Weidner