The Anti-Sam Brownback Blog

Having nixed the Miers nomination, Senator Sam Brownback now has the Supreme Court nominee he wants. Samuel Alito appears to be the sort of right wing lemming that will attempt to advance the conservative agenda for the next 30 years. Obviously a Brownback dream. You would think the good Senator could come up with his own talking points for his news show appearances. Apparently not.

BROWNBACK: …Things do change, and positions change. He’s advocating for a position in a conservative administration at that time — in an administration. Now he’s going on the Supreme Court of the United States if approved by the United States Senate.

And these are different jobs altogether, and they have different parameters with them all together. And he’s not going to answer questions about how he’s going to rule on a Roe-type case, and he shouldn’t.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But let me stop you there. That wasn’t a matter of personal opinion. He was expressing his belief, his constitutional interpretation. Why should someone who is going to sit on the Supreme Court not have to answer what his interpretation of the Constitution is? I mean, that was a very straight statement.

BROWNBACK: Well, because these are very active cases that will be in front of him. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she’s general counsel for the ACLU at one point in time. And does she go back to her positions she took then to say, This is how I will decide a case on the Supreme Court ? That’s just not the way the system works, nor is it, because then you’ve got people on the bench that have predecided the case. And that’s not where you get fair justice on the facts and the law, both involved in each of these cases.

We should determine about judicial philosophy and issues of judicial restraint and views toward the overall look of the Constitution, which I think are fully appropriate. And we need to look at the 15 years of written opinions he’s got out there.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You know, I’m a little surprised that you’re so comfortable with this, because you expressed some discomfort during the John Roberts hearings that he wasn’t being more forthcoming about his interpretation of the right to privacy and whether Roe could stand.
And it doesn’t worry you at all that he’s not willing to stand by a position that I’m sure you agree with?

There’s

BROWNBACK: Well, it does concern me from the standpoint that, as a personal person in the legislative process, I would like to see that out there. When I run for the U.S. Senate, I’m out there stating clearly my position, just as Ted Kennedy does. But this is a different job.

And I think we’ve just come to a point in time that the best we can do is be able to look at what their position has been in written court opinions and try to be able to extrapolate out of that. I wish he would say things that were more strong and an opinion right now on the issues of is there a constitutional right to an abortion, which is not in the Constitution. But he’s not going to say that at this point in time, and it would be to prejudge a case.

Give me a break. The Ginsburg reference again. Does he not have an original thought or is he trying to make up for his outspoken opposition to Bush’s domestic spying?

In any case, the upcoming hearings are very important for Brownback’s future. He needs to come off both as a hero for conservative activists and as a person who a normal human being could agree with. Not any easy task. He will, however, be in demand as a prominent conservative member of the Senate Judiciary committee. Expect to see him quoted much more often in the next few weeks.