|
COPYRIGHT 2005 Congressional Quarterly, Inc.
Original Source: Political Transcript Wire
PUBLIC ADVOCATE HOLDS A NEWS CONFERENCE ON JUDGE JOHN ROBERTS' NOMINATION TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT
AUGUST 10, 2005
SPEAKER: EUGENE DELGAUDIO, PRESIDENT OF PUBLIC ADVOCATE
[*] DELGAUDIO: Hi. Thank you very much for being here. I am Eugene Delgaudio, president of Public Advocate. I came here this morning to read a statement and also to answer questions about my deliberation on the Judge Roberts nomination for the Supreme Court.
First, a little bit of background about myself. Let me introduce Donnie. Donnie is on our staff, Donnie Ferguson. We have another member of our staff here, Arthur; another member of our staff, Julia. If you wish to get their statement or -- they will not be giving statements. They'll give their age and their name to help the reporters here who have gotten it already.
A little background: Our Web site is www.publicadvocateUSA.org. I've been involved since 1981 as executive director and now president of Public Advocate. I've been involved as leader of that organization in legal battles before the Supreme Court, through my attorneys, in defense of the Boy Scouts of America.
I've been involved with legislative battles to pass laws to protect the families, to promote the passing of a constitutional amendment to protect traditional marriage in America. I have been arguing, through my attorneys, before the Supreme Court.
I supported Judge Robert Bork. I supported Judge Clarence Thomas. I've been involved on the pro side. I've also been critical of Republicans when they take stands that I consider to be opposite the positions of our organization.
Last year, Vice President Richard Cheney claimed that freedom involved allowing gay marriage. I said, "True freedom in this country and in this world is not embracing perversion."
I've also -- when Judge Scalia in 1990, after his confirmation, voted in a five-member majority to embrace the burning of the American flag, I took his robes and I burned them where we are right here with 1,000 people present and made the message clear: constructionism, constructionism.
We do not want creative law-making on this court.
And now to the merits of the John Roberts situation. Public Advocate has waged a mail campaign in support of Mr. Roberts. Public Advocate has waged an online petition campaign in support of Mr. Roberts. We have issued public statements, petition drives. We can no longer do this in good faith on the basis of his opposition in the Romer case in Colorado.
When Judge Roberts was a partner at the firm of Hogan & Hartson, he volunteered, that is, he gave up his free will to give the free legal advice to the radical homosexual lobby in their successful attempt to use judicial activism to overturn the will of the people of Colorado, the people of Colorado and the people of the United States.
Public Advocate and its membership can no longer mail in support of Judge Roberts. This mail campaign, which was projected to mail over a million pieces, is canceled. I issued the order for cancellation of this mail campaign yesterday. Mr. Roberts complains he's a constructionist. He claims that he strictly interprets the Constitution. That is the candidate we want. That is the candidate we demand. And yet, when given the option to volunteer, he volunteered to help the opposition to constructionism. And I'm talking about the strict interpretation of judicial acts.
What was involved in the referendum in Colorado? The people of Colorado amended their Constitution to make it illegal to discriminate against Christian moral values being expressed publicly. That was the intent, and that was the fact...
Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.
|
Bookmark this article
Print this article
Link to this article
Email this article
Digg It!
Add to del.icio.us
RSS
