That's the question Hugh Hewitt asks in his column at townhall.com today.
The question is a good one, especially in light of this article at The Politico today.
A Politico review of the 75 judges Giuliani appointed to three of New York state's lower courts found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans by more than 8 to 1. One of his appointments was an officer of the International Association of Lesbian and Gay Judges. Another ruled that the state law banning liquor sales on Sundays was unconstitutional because it was insufficiently secular.
A third, an abortion-rights supporter, later made it to the federal bench in part because New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a liberal Democrat, said he liked her ideology.
Cumulatively, Giuilani's record was enough to win applause from people like Kelli Conlin, the head of NARAL Pro-Choice New York, the state's leading abortion-rights group. "They were decent, moderate people," she said.
In an interview with Hewitt, Giuliani said he would want to appoint more justices like Roberts and Alito, but that's obviously not what his record shows. On the other hand, New York is New York, and appointing more liberal judges shouldn't be surprising.
As Hewitt notes, just behind the War on Terror, the appointment of judges should be the top priority for conservatives. Who would appoint better judges?
I'm still very undecided in this race. I haven't seen a candidate so far that excites me, but it is still extremely early in the race. I like Giuliani in some ways, largely for his law and order approach. I also like him because--let's face it--he seems to be the most electable candidate Republicans are fielding.
Would he appoint judges like Roberts and Alito? Or would he give us another Sandra Day O'Connor? Remember, she was an appointee of that most conservative of Republicans, Ronald Reagan.
|