Supreme Court News, Information & Action
TCC in the News: | CNS
| WND | WashPost | Tuscaloosa
ACTION: Sign the Roy
Moore for Supreme Court Petition!
with Howard Phillips by Dan Flynn at FlynnFiles:
1 | Part
2 | Part 3 |
with Howard Phillips by LifeSite on Judge Roberts
Here Come The Braves! | July
Here come the Braves! From an early
age, perhaps seven or eight, I was a big fan of the then Boston Braves. I
collected their autographs and visited them at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital in
Brighton when they were recuperating from injuries. I recall conversations with
Warren Spahn (the great southpaw), Del Crandall (the catcher), and Joe Adcock
(the magnificent first baseman).
My home in Brighton was in walking
distance of Braves Field and I attended games whenever I could, usually in the
bleachers where a ticket cost no more than $1 or $2.
I wept bitter tears when, in 1952,
the Braves left Boston for Milwaukee. However, I remained loyal throughout their
tenure in Milwaukee and now in Atlanta.
One reason for my disdain of the
very popular Boston Red Sox was the mocking and ridicule I suffered as a
youngster in Boston at the hands of Red Sox fans who never had a good word to
say about the Braves. That’s why last year I rooted for the Yankees against
the Red Sox in the division series, and for the Cardinals against the Red Sox in
the World Series.
One of my great joys came two years
ago when Hank Aaron let me use his four tickets behind home plate at Turner
Filed to celebrate my son, Sam’s, 17th birthday. I was joined by my wife,
Peggy, and my grandson, Aaron, the eldest child of my son, Brad Phillips.
The Braves have won their division
title 13 years in a row against incredible odds and an ever declining budget. In
recent years, for financial reasons, they have had to give up some of their top
pitchers, including Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux, Kevin Millwood, and Russ Ortiz.
They have also been forced to surrender some of their best sluggers, including
catcher Javy Lopez, J.D. Drew and New York Yankees outfielder Gary Sheffield.
The Braves have been sustained this
year by some extraordinary performances on the part of pitcher John Smoltz,
outfielder Andruw Jones, and third baseman Chipper Jones.
My latest hero is Julio Franco, the
amazing Braves first baseman who at the age of 46 years and 10 months hit a
grand slam home run on June 27. Franco is the oldest player to accomplish that
feat, in addition to being the oldest player to hit two home runs in a single
game and steal two bases in a single game. Julio is magnificent and an example
for all of us.
Perhaps the key to the Braves’
continuing success is its trio of management leaders: including baseball’s
greatest pitching coach, Leo Mazzone, its greatest manager on the field, Bobby
Cox, and its greatest general manager, John Scheurholz. These three men have
done more with less every year.
When I worked as Assistant to the
Chairman of the Republican National Committee from 1966 to 1968, one of my
colleagues and mentors was the late AB Hermann, a former Boston Braves first
baseman who took the time to arrange personal visits for me with some of the
Braves veterans still active in baseball.
Ann Coulter on the
Roberts Nomination | July 22, 2005
Ann Coulter has written a
brilliant column on the Roberts’ nomination, and it should be read by
every conservative and Christian leader. The text follows:
After pretending to consider
various women and minorities for the Supreme Court these past few weeks,
President Bush decided to disappoint all the groups he had just ginned up
and nominate a white male.
So all we know about him for
sure is that he can't dance and he probably doesn't know who Jay-Z is. Other
than that, he is a blank slate. Tabula rasa. Big zippo. Nada. Oh, yeah ...
we also know he's argued cases before the Supreme Court. Big deal; so has
Larry Flynt's attorney.
But unfortunately, other than
that, we don't know much about John Roberts. Stealth nominees have never
turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever.
Since the announcement,
court-watchers have been like the old Kremlinologists from Soviet days
looking for clues as to what kind of justice Roberts will be. Will he let us
Does he live in a small,
rough-hewn cabin in the woods of New Hampshire and avoid "women
Does he trust democracy? Or
will he make all the important decisions for us and call them
It means absolutely nothing
that NARAL and Planned Parenthood attack him: They also attacked Sandra Day
O'Connor, Anthony Kennedy and David Hackett Souter.
The only way a Supreme Court
nominee could win the approval of NARAL and Planned Parenthood would be to
actually perform an abortion during his confirmation hearing, live, on
camera, and preferably a partial birth one.
It means nothing that Roberts
wrote briefs arguing for the repeal of Roe v. Wade when he worked for
Republican administrations. He was arguing on behalf of his client, the
United States of America. Roberts has specifically disassociated himself
from those cases, dropping a footnote to a 1994 law review article that
"In the interest of full
disclosure, the author would like to point out that as deputy solicitor
general for a portion of the 1992-93 term, he was involved in many of the
cases discussed below. In the interest of even fuller disclosure, he would
also like to point out that his views as a commentator on those cases do not
necessarily reflect his views as an advocate for his former client, the
This would have been the legal
equivalent, after O.J.'s acquittal, of Johnnie Cochran saying, "Hey, I
never said the guy was innocent. I was just doing my job."
And it makes no difference that
conservatives in the White House are assuring us Roberts can be trusted. We
got the exact same assurances from officials working for the last president
Bush about David Hackett Souter.
I believe their exact words
were, "Read our lips; Souter's a reliable conservative."
From the theater of the absurd
category, the Republican National Committee's "talking points" on
Roberts provide this little tidbit:
"In the 1995 case of Barry
v. Little, Judge Roberts argued – free of charge – before the D.C. Court
of Appeals on behalf of a class of the neediest welfare recipients,
challenging a termination of benefits under the District's Public Assistance
Act of 1982."
I'm glad to hear the man has a
steady work record, but how did this make it to the top of his resume?
Bill Clinton goes around
bragging that he passed welfare reform, which was, admittedly, the one
public policy success of his entire administration (passed by the Republican
Congress). But now apparently Republicans want to pretend it's the party of
welfare queens! Soon the RNC will be boasting that Republicans want to raise
your taxes and surrender in the war on terrorism, too.
Finally, lets ponder the fact
that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying
anything controversial. That's just unnatural.
By contrast, I held out for
three months, tops, before dropping my first rhetorical bombshell, which I
think was about Goldwater.
It's especially unnatural for
someone who is smart, and there's no question but that Roberts is smart.
If a smart and accomplished
person goes this long without expressing an opinion, they'd better be
pursuing the Miss America title.
Apparently, Roberts decided
early on that he wanted to be on the Supreme Court and that the way to do
that was not to express a personal opinion on anything to anybody ever. It's
as if he is from some space alien sleeper cell. Maybe the space aliens are
trying to help us, but I wish we knew that.
If the Senate were in Democrat
hands, Roberts would be perfect. But why on earth would Bush waste a
nomination on a person who is a complete blank slate when we have a majority
in the Senate!
We also have a majority in the
House, state legislatures, state governorships, and have won five of the
last seven presidential elections – seven of the last ten!
We're the Harlem Globetrotters
now – why do we have to play the Washington Generals every week?
Conservatism is sweeping the
nation, we have a fully functioning alternative media, we're ticked off and
ready to avenge Robert Bork ... and Bush nominates a Rorschach blot.
Even as they are losing voters,
Democrats don't hesitate to nominate reliable left-wing lunatics like Ruth
Bader Ginsburg to lifetime sinecures on the High Court. And the vast
majority of Americans loathe her views.
As I've said before, if a
majority of Americans agreed with liberals on abortion, gay marriage,
pornography, criminals' rights and property rights – liberals wouldn't
need the Supreme Court to give them everything they want through invented
"constitutional" rights invisible to everyone but People For the
American Way. It's always good to remind voters that Democrats are the party
of abortion, sodomy and atheism, and nothing presents an opportunity to do
so like a Supreme Court nomination.
"filibuster" fracas, one lonely voice in the woods admonished
Republicans: "Of your six minutes on TV, use 30 seconds to point out
the Democrats are abusing the filibuster and the other five and a half
minutes to ask liberals to explain why they think Bush's judicial nominees
are 'extreme.'" Republicans ignored this advice, spent the next several
weeks arguing about the history of the filibuster, and lost the fight.
Now we come to find out from
last Sunday's New York Times – the enemy's own playbook! – that the
Democrats actually took polls and determined that they could not defeat
Bush's conservative judicial nominees on ideological grounds. They could win
majority support only if they argued turgid procedural points.
That's why the entire nation
had to be bored to death with arguments about the filibuster earlier this
The Democrats' own polls showed
voters are no longer fooled by claims that the Democrats are trying to block
"judges who would roll back civil rights." Borking is over.
And Bush responds by nominating
a candidate who will allow Democrats to avoid fighting on their weakest
ground – substance. He has given us a Supreme Court nomination that will
placate no liberals and should please no conservatives.
Maybe Roberts will contravene
the sordid history of "stealth nominees" and be the Scalia or
Thomas Bush promised us when he was asking for our votes. Or maybe he won't.
The Supreme Court shouldn't be a game of Russian roulette.!
Ann Coulter, well-known for her
television appearances as a political analyst, is an attorney and author.
Dubbed "one of the 20 most fascinating women in politics" by
George magazine, Coulter has appeared on ABC's "This Week,"
"Good Morning America," NBC's "Today," CNN's "Larry
King Live" and CNBC's "Rivera Live."
John G. Roberts, Jr. | July
Let’s be judicious in
evaluating President Bush’s choice of John G. Roberts, Jr. to serve on the
U.S. Supreme Court.
Areas of possible concern
include his tenure with the liberal establishment law firm Hogan &
Hartson and his work with the left-wing Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights
Under Law. A big red flag for me was the fact that he twice referred to the
United States government as a “Constitutional democracy”, whereas the
Constitution makes clear that we are a “republic” and that a republican
form of government is guaranteed to each state.
On the plus side regarding Mr.
Roberts is his strong backing from William Rehnquist who has been one of the
better members of the Supreme Court.
We have a lot to learn, and The
Conservative Caucus is currently involved in a major research project so
that we can come to a considered, responsible conclusion regarding the
prospective tenure of Judge Roberts.
Sandra Day O'Connor | July
On Friday, July 1, when Sandra Day
O’Connor announced her intention to resign as a Justice of the U.S. Supreme
Court, I issued the following statement:
PRESIDENT BUSH SHOULD NOMINATE
"TEN COMMANDMENTS JUDGE" ROY MOORE TO THE SUPREME COURT
"President Bush should
nominate former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore to replace Sandra
Day O'Connor in the U.S. Supreme Court", Howard Phillips, Chairman of The
Conservative Caucus, said today.
"Sandra Day O'Connor's
appointment by Ronald Reagan was a foreseeable disaster," Phillips
continued. "As I pointed out in 1981, Mrs. O'Connor was a pro-abortion
member of the Arizona State Senate and a liberal judge on the Arizona Court of
Appeals. She was chosen because of her gender and a desire to attract to the GOP
the support of feminists.
"Judge Roy Moore also has a
track record. He is a rock-solid defender of the right to acknowledge God, a foe
of sodomy and abortion, and a critic of the ‘legal positivism' embraced by
David Souter, Anthony Kennedy, John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and
Phillips concluded: "Roy Moore
is the best choice that President Bush could make."
TCC, founded in 1974, is a public
policy action group committed to restoring the Republic by limiting the Federal
government to its delegated, enumerated Constitutional functions and returning
American jurisprudence to its Biblical Common Law foundations.
It frankly disgusted me to hear
paeans of praise for Mrs. O’Connor from politicians characterized as
conservative, including, particularly, George Bush and Bill Frist (whose praise
for O’Connor was a red flag for those who oppose Roe v. Wade and
prohibitions on the acknowledgement of God in the public square).
President Bush was his typically
smarmy self, telling his friend, Sandra, in a private conversation, "For an
old ranching girl, you turned out pretty good"…
As they talked, Bush also told her,
"I wish I was there to hug you".
In his public statement, President
Bush said "When President Ronald Reagan appoint Justice O’Connor 24 years
ago, Americans had high expectations of her and she has surpassed these
expectations in the performance of her duties…She leave an outstanding record
of service to the Untied States and our nation is deeply grateful".
The reality is that Mrs. O’Connor
was one of the worst appointments ever made by a Republican President, in this
case Ronald Reagan.
In many respects, she was worse
than William J. Brennan and John Paul Stevens, although she was not quite as bad
as David Souter, against whose confirmation I testified on the basis of his
public record. In fact, I was the only conservative who opposed the Souter
nomination, the others relying on the word of White House Chief of Staff John
Sununu, the former governor of New Hampshire, who said that the Souter choice
was a "home run".
Unfortunately, my conservative
colleagues trusted Bush and Sununu more than they trusted the facts – – –
which showed that Souter had changed the policies of two New Hampshire
hospitals, Concord Memorial and Darmouth Hitchcock, from zero abortion to
convenience abortion. Moreover, Souter had written, in his law school thesis,
which was, in many ways, a tribute to Oliver Wendell Holmes, that he believed in
no "higher law" but was instead a legal positivist.
Despite my entreaties, not a single
Republican Senator opposed Souter’s confirmation, just as not one of them had
opposed the confirmation of Sandra Day O’Connor.
Indeed, there were only three
opposition votes cast to Bill Clinton’s most left-wing nominee, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, and only nine against Ted Kennedy’s protégé, Stephen Breyer.
Lest, we forget how invidious,
immoral, and destructive was Sandra Day O’Connor’s tenure in the U.S.
Supreme Court, recall these words of hers with which Justice Anthony Kennedy and
Justice David Souter associated themselves in Planned Parenthood of
Southeastern PA. v. Casey: "The Roe rule’s limitation on state
power could not be repudiated without serious inequity to people who, for two
decades of economic and social developments, have organized intimate
relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their
places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that
contraception should fail. The ability of women to participate equally in the
economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to
control their reproductive lives".
Mrs. O’Connor also did
extraordinary damage by pushing the Lemon v. Kurzman doctrine that
religious references in the public square are only permissible when they have a
She also supported the
pro-homosexual Lawrence v. Texas decision and opposed imposition of the death
penalty for brutal murderers under the age of 17.
I could go on, but Mrs. O’Connor’s
record should be obvious to all, and is a disgraceful example of how President
Ronald Reagan deferred to the political and policy counsel of pro-abortion
subordinates such as White House Chief of Staff James Baker.
It is interesting to note that Mrs.
O’Connor was elevated to Arizona’s Court of Appeals in 1979 by left-wing
Democrat Governor Bruce Babbitt. She was a big promoter of ERA, supporter of
bi-lingual education, and, as a judge, she voted against a ban on funds for
abortions for poor women and opposed a bill prohibiting abortions at the
University of Arizona Hospital.
Congratulations to Oklahoma Senator
Tom Coburn for disparaging O’Connor for "self-indulgent judicial
Roy Moore for Supreme Court
News Conference | July 18, 2005
At a news conference today
(7/13/05), I made the following statement promoting "Ten Commandments
Judge" Roy Moore as the standard against which other prospective Supreme
Court nominees ought be measured:
My friends, this is a crucial
moment in the history of the American republic. The character and the undaunted
courage of one faithful man seated on the U.S. Supreme Court could bring about a
turning point in our jurisprudence and in our culture, back to Biblical morality
and forward to a restoration of the Constitutional design and system of liberty
set forth by American’s founding fathers.
I speak of that great patriot, that
exemplary jurist, God’s man for these times, the Honorable Roy Moore.
Roy Moore sacrificed his position
as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court rather than submit to an
unconstitutional demand by Federal judges to remove a Ten Commandments monument
from the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building.
Judge Moore is a graduate of West
Point, a decorated Vietnam vet, a comprehensively knowledgeable student of the
Constitution and a dedicated family man.
He is truly a great man whose
courage has helped awaken millions of Americans to the assault on our heritage,
our beliefs, and our religious liberty, and he has inspired God-fearing,
freedom-loving Americans in every part of our nation to join the fight to
liberate our Constitutional Republic from judicial tyranny.
After West Point, Judge Roy Moore
served our country as a U.S. Army Company Commander in Vietnam before earning a
Juris Doctor degree from the University of Alabama Law School.
A highly respected Constitutional
scholar, Judge Moore served as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama
since 2001 until he was suspended for refusing to remove the Ten Commandments
from his courthouse and insisting that, as Chief Justice, he would continue to
Judge Moore has been recognized as
a "tireless defender of individual liberties", "Christian
Statesman of the Year", "Defender of the Bill of Rights", and was
named "Champion of Liberty" by the U.S. Taxpayers Alliance.
Roy Moore was first thrust into the
national spotlight in the 1990s when he successfully held his ground against
another unconstitutional court order demanding that he remove a tablet of the
Ten Commandments, which he had carved by hand and hung on the wall alongside his
court bench in Etowah County, Alabama.
Judge Moore has been vilified in
the media, betrayed by the Alabama Republican hierarchy (including tax-hiking
GOP Governor Bob Riley and Karl Rove’s judicial candidate, Bill Pryor, the
Alabama Attorney General).
Through it all, Judge Moore
conducted himself with modesty, humility, and courage.
And while, sadly, he was removed
from his position as the elected Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court –
– – knowledgeable Americans are grateful that Roy Moore took a principled
stand against the usurpation of authority by Constitutionally defiant judges.
Chief Justice Moore upheld the rule of law against judges and bureaucrats who
flagrantly moved to set aside the U.S. Constitution in favor of their personal
Most public figures would have
wilted under pressure, but Judge Roy Moore fears God, not man.
Roy Moore has conducted himself
with courage and integrity, never surrendering, never wavering – – – and
his example may prove to be a turning point in American history.
I have been encouraged by the
enthusiasm of the many thousands of freedom-loving, God-fearing Americans who
have rallied behind this great man and his righteous cause.
More and more God-fearing,
freedom-loving Americans correctly see Roy Moore as a man of principle standing
up for faith, freedom, and the rule of law, as America’s Founding Fathers
Already more than 85,000 have
signed Petitions urging President Bush to appoint him to the U.S. Supreme Court.
What a great victory for God,
family, and country it would be if Roy Moore were nominated and confirmed as a
Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court!
As a U.S. Supreme Court Justice,
Judge Moore would strictly interpret the law according to the U.S. Constitution.
He would defend our right to
acknowledge God – – – in public prayer, in the Pledge of Allegiance, and
in displays which have the Biblical message of God’s Ten Commandments.
Judge Moore has kept his oath to
the Constitution of Alabama and to the Constitution of the United States. He has
upheld the law. He has obeyed his duty to God, to the people of Alabama and to
the citizens of the United States of America. I urge President George W. Bush to
nominate the man best qualified in our entire nation to uphold the Constitution
of the United States and the laws of God on which that Constitution is premised.
Joining me at the news conference
were Dr. Alan Keyes (The Declaration Foundation), Maryland Republican Delegate
Don Dwyer (Director of the Institute on the Constitution), Rev. Rob Schenck
(National Clergy Council), and Lancaster, Pennsylvania Attorney James Clymer
(Chairman of the Constitution Party National Committee)
Media representatives included:
Mary Orndorff (Birmingham News), Sara Michael (Tuscaloosa News),
James Brosnan (Birmingham Post), and Hanna Rosin (The Washington Post).
Supreme Court & Ten
Commandments | July 14, 2005
The Supreme Court rulings in the
two Ten Commandments cases concerning which they issued Opinions on June 27 are
Basically, what the court is saying
is that it is unconstitutional for any public entity (Federal, state, or local)
to acknowledge God by means of the Ten Commandments, which is after all the
foundation for America’s law system.
This ruling emphasizes once again
the urgency of Congress acting to pass the Constitution Restoration Act [CRA]
(H.R. 1070 and S. 520).
The full text of the Senate bill
reads as follows:
To limit the jurisdiction of
Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED
March 3, 2005
Mr. SHELBY (for himself, Mr.
BROWNBACK, and Mr. BURR) introduced the following bill (S. 520); which was read
twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
To limit the jurisdiction of
Federal courts in certain cases and promote federalism.
Be it enacted by the Senate and
House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the
'Constitution Restoration Act of 2005'.
SEC. 101. APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
(a) Amendment to Title 28- Chapter
81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
`Sec. 1260. Matters not reviewable
`Notwithstanding any other
provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to
review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent
that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local
government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local
government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity),
concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the
sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.
(b) Table of Sections- The table
of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
`1260. Matters not reviewable.'.
SEC. 102. LIMITATIONS ON
(a) Amendment to Title 28- Chapter
85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end of the
`Sec. 1370. Matters that the
Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review
`Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, the district courts shall not have jurisdiction of a matter
if the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review that matter by
reason of section 1260 of this title.'.
(b) Table of Sections- The table
of sections at the beginning of chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
`1370. Matters that the
Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review.'.
SEC. 201. INTERPRETATION OF THE
In interpreting and applying the
Constitution of the United States, a court of the United States may not rely
upon any constitution, law, administrative rule, Executive order, directive,
policy, judicial decision, or any other action of any foreign state or
international organization or agency, other than English constitutional and
common law up to the time of the adoption of the Constitution of the United
SEC. 301. EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL CASES
NOT BINDING ON STATES.
Any decision of a Federal court
which has been made prior to, on, or after the effective date of this Act, to
the extent that the decision relates to an issue removed from Federal
jurisdiction under section 1260 or 1370 of title 28, United States Code, as
added by this Act, is not binding precedent on any State court.
SEC. 302. IMPEACHMENT, CONVICTION,
AND REMOVAL OF JUDGES FOR CERTAIN EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL ACTIVITIES.
To the extent that a justice of the
Supreme Court of the United States or any judge of any Federal court engages in
any activity that exceeds the jurisdiction of the court of that justice or
judge, as the case may be, by reason of section 1260 or 1370 of title 28, United
States Code, as added by this Act, engaging in that activity shall be deemed to
constitute the commission of--
(1) an offense for which the
judge may be removed upon impeachment and conviction; and
(2) a breach of the standard of
good behavior required by article III, section 1 of the Constitution.
Senate cosponsors of S. 520 are:
House cosponsors of the companion bill, H.R. 1070, are:
Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 6/8/2005
Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 4/5/2005
Bachus, Spencer [AL-6] - 3/3/2005
Barrett, J. Gresham [SC-3] - 3/3/2005
Bishop, Rob [UT-1] - 3/3/2005
Brown, Henry E., Jr. [SC-1] - 6/8/2005
Cannon, Chris [UT-3] - 3/3/2005
Cantor, Eric [VA-7] - 3/3/2005
Davis, Jo Ann [VA-1] - 3/3/2005
Deal, Nathan [GA-10] - 5/3/2005
Emerson, Jo Ann [MO-8] - 6/28/2005
Everett, Terry [AL-2] - 3/3/2005
Foxx, Virginia [NC-5] - 3/3/2005
Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 4/5/2005
Goode, Virgil H., Jr. [VA-5] - 3/3/2005
Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] - 3/3/2005
Herger, Wally [CA-2] - 3/3/2005
Jenkins, William L. [TN-1] - 6/8/2005
Jones, Walter B., Jr. [NC-3] - 3/3/2005
Lewis, Ron [KY-2] - 3/3/2005
McCotter, Thaddeus G. [MI-11] - 3/3/2005
McIntyre, Mike [NC-7] - 3/3/2005
Myrick, Sue [NC-9] - 6/30/2005
Norwood, Charlie [GA-9] - 4/5/2005
Pearce, Stevan [NM-2] - 6/28/2005
Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 3/3/2005
Pitts, Joseph R. [PA-16] - 3/3/2005
Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 6/28/2005
Price, Tom [GA-6] - 3/3/2005
Rogers, Mike D. [AL-3] - 3/3/2005
Ryun, Jim [KS-2] - 3/3/2005
Sodrel, Michael E. [IN-9] - 4/14/2005
Souder, Mark E. [IN-3] - 3/3/2005
Stearns, Cliff [FL-6] - 6/17/2005
Sullivan, John [OK-1] - 4/5/2005
Wamp, Zach [TN-3] - 3/3/2005
Weldon, Dave [FL-15] - 3/3/2005
Wilson, Joe [SC-2] - 3/3/2005
If any of your senators or representatives in Congress have
failed to sign on as a co-sponsor of the CRA, please get on their case. Your
help is needed now.
The Reason We Still Have
Abortion in the USA | July 13, 2005
I told Marc Morano of Conservative News Service that
conservatives and Christians have too often based their reaction to
obviously pro-abortion judicial nominees on emotional affection for the
incumbent Republican President, whether it is Reagan (Sandra Day O’Connor),
George H.W. Bush (David Souter), or George W. Bush (Alberto Gonzales).
time to replace emotion with facts and to recognize that blind loyalty to
the Republican Party by Christians and conservatives is the reason we still
have abortion on demand throughout the United States of America. CNS
The Records of O'Connor
& Souter were Entirely Foreseeable | July 12, 2005
I was interviewed by Charlie Butts of USA
Radio concerning TCC’s campaign to place "Ten Commandments Judge" Roy
Moore on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In the 10-minute interview, which was broadcast nationwide, I
encouraged listeners to contact President Bush at the White House, as well as
their two U.S. Senators in support of Judge Moore. I emphasized that, contrary
to popular myth, the likely rulings of prospective nominees are entirely
On the basis of her pro-abortion radical feminist record as a
member of the Arizona Court of Appeals and an Arizona State Senator, there was
no doubt that Sandra Day O’Connor would turn out as badly as she did.
That’s why her nomination by President Reagan was applauded by every Left-wing
feminist group in America, including the National Organization for Women (NOW).
Similarly, David Souter’s record was entirely
foreseeable on the basis of his law school thesis in which he rejected higher
law and embraced the legal positivism of Oliver Wendell Holmes. Moreover, as the
trustee of two New Hampshire hospitals (Concord Memorial and Dartmouth
Hitchcock), he had succeeded in changing the policies of those hospitals from
zero abortion to convenience abortion.
I observed that Roy Moore is not on the White House short list
for the Supreme Court because of the hostility of White House Deputy Chief of
Staff Karl Rove, who was turned down by Roy Moore when Rove asked Moore
to hire him in connection with Moore’s campaign for the Alabama Supreme Court.
Rejected by Judge Moore, Rove became a hired hand for the man
whom Moore ultimately defeated, Harold See. Similarly, Rove, who had been
hired by William Pryor in his campaign for Alabama Attorney General, prodded
Pryor to lead the effort to remove Roy Moore as Chief Justice of the Alabama
Supreme Court when Moore refused to move a Ten Commandments monument from the
Alabama judicial building over which he presided.
I made the point that, with rare exceptions, those being
mentioned as likely Bush nominees have flaws, in many cases having declared the
view that Roe v. Wade is "settled law". By contrast, Roy Moore
is 100 percent solid on every issue from abortion to sodomy to the Ten
Commandments. He is thoroughly knowledgeable in Constitutional history and
rejects the Darwinian evolutionary view of the Constitution as a
"living" document. Who in America is better suited to sit on the U.S.
Supreme Court, indeed, to serve as Chief Justice than Roy Moore? Those who wish
to help Judge Moore can call the White House switchboard at 202-456-1414 or
their U.S. Senators at 202-224-3121.
Support Growing for Roy
Moore | July 11, 2005
Support for former Alabama Supreme
Court Chief Justice Roy Moore to be named to the Supreme Court of the United
States is growing daily.
Here follows the text of a Petition
which has been widely distributed by The Conservative Caucus:
ROY MOORE FOR SUPREME COURT
Petition to George W. Bush
President of the United States of America
Court Justices are consistently unfaithful to the plain text of the
U.S. Constitution, and
Court needs more Justices with the perspective of Anontin Scalia and
Clarence Thomas and fewer pro-abortion, pro-homosexual Justices such
as David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
petition President Bush to nominate to the Supreme Court Judge Roy
Moore, who has already demonstrated his understanding of and fidelity
to the U.S. Constitution.
Already 85,000 Americans have
signed this Petition and mailings promoting Roy Moore for Supreme Court have
been sent to some 725,000 families.
If you agree with TCC’s campaign
urging President Bush to nominate Roy Moore, please read the Petition and e-mail
your signature of support to Art
Harman, our Webmaster.
Gonzales vs. the
Constitution | July 8, 2005
One of Alberto Gonzales’s
disqualifying statements is that "The Constitution is what the Supreme
Court says it is".
He neglects the provision in
the Constitution which makes clear that the Supreme Court is under the
Constitution and not over it.
Article VI clearly states
"This Constitution, and the Law of the United States which shall be
made in Pursuance thereof…shall be the supreme Law of the Land."
This point is further
reinforced by the language in Article III which makes clear that the
appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may be limited by Congress.
Gonzales has always associated
himself with the view that Roe v. Wade is "settled law".
Supreme Court | July
For immediate release
July 1, 2005
Contact: Charles Orndorff
PRESIDENT BUSH SHOULD NOMINATE "TEN COMMANDMENTS
JUDGE" ROY MOORE TO THE SUPREME COURT
Vienna, VA. "President Bush should nominate former
Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore to replace Sandra Day O'Connor
in the U.S. Supreme Court", Howard Phillips, Chairman of The
Conservative Caucus, said today.
"Sandra Day O'Connor's appointment by Ronald Reagan was
a foreseeable disaster," Phillips continued. "As I pointed out in
1981, Mrs. O'Connor was a pro-abortion member of the Arizona State Senate
and a liberal judge on the Arizona Court of Appeals. She was chosen because
of her gender and a desire to attract to the GOP the support of
"Judge Roy Moore also has a track record. He is a
rock-solid defender of the right to acknowledge God, a foe of sodomy and
abortion, and a critic of the ‘legal positivism' embraced by David Souter,
Anthony Kennedy, John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and Steven Breyer.
Phillips concluded: "Roy Moore is the best choice that
President Bush could make."
TCC, founded in 1974, is a public policy action group
committed to restoring the Republic by limiting the Federal government to
its delegated, enumerated Constitutional functions and returning American
jurisprudence to its Biblical Common Law foundations.
HowardPhillips.com every day for the latest commentary, news and action
items in support of restoring our Constitutional Republic
To support the many important projects of The Conservative Caucus with a donation,
please call 703-938-9626 or use your credit card.