Rudy on Judges II

Captain Ed has this quote from Giulliani:

On the Federal judiciary I would want judges who are strict constructionists because I am. I'm a lawyer. I've argued cases in the Supreme Court. I've argued cases in the Court of Appeals in different parts of the country. I have a very, very strong view that for this country to work, for our freedoms to be protected, judges have to interpret not invent the Constitution. Otherwise you end up, when judges invent the constitution, with your liberties being hurt. Because legislatures get to make those decisions and the legislature in South Carolina might make that decision one way and the legislature in California a different one. And that's part of our freedom and when that's taken away from you that's terrible.

President Bush has the great model because I think as the President he did appointed some really good ones and both of them are former colleagues of mine - Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito. Justice Scalia is a former colleague of mine. Somebody that … I think Chief Justice Roberts is a great chief justice and he's young and he can have a long career and that's probably the reason the President and Vice President chose him. I think those are the kinds of justices I would appoint – Scalia, Alito and Roberts. If you can find anybody as good as that, you are very, very fortunate.

I'm happy enough with that. Of course, what I want isn't strict constructionists at all, but given that it remains the conservative malapropism of choice for the kind of judges that I do want, I'll take this as encouraging. In my view:

I don't necessarily mind if Rudy is a RINO on social policy, because my strongest commitments, the ones that I am the most attatched to above all else, are about how, not what. I don't mind if Rudy supports gay marriage and abortion, as long as he understands how the Constitution contemplates such questions being answered, and will appoint judges and justices who share that understanding. The big lie -- and it is a lie, and everyone who advances it is a liar, and anyone who believes it is a moron -- is that one's view on abortion must define one's view of Roe-Casey. My view on the legitimacy of those cases has nothing whatsoever to do with my view on abortion, and everything to do with my view on what the Constitution of the United States says and how it should be construed by the Supreme Court of the United States. As long as Giulliani shares that understanding -- and he has given indication that he does -- then I can live with his being President. Within the narrow sphere that I believe the Federal government has a role to play in the abortion debate, I can live with him vetoing bills from a Republican Congress conditioning federal funding on refusal to provide abortions, and I can live with him signing bills from the Democrats letting it happen in the District of Columbia or the military. I won't be happy about it, but I'll live with it if he understands that these are not decisions that are removed from the democratic process by the Constitution, and will appoint judges who agree and will rule accordingly.

Related: Rudy on Judges I.

Post facto:
Rudy on Judges III (3/2/07)