Reminding Americans everywhere why the sight of the door hitting his ass on the way out is something we should all rejoice over, John Ashcroft blasted federal judges for, you know, actually making rulings based on the Constitution and not the needs of the War on Terror.

"The danger I see here is that intrusive judicial oversight and second-guessing of presidential determinations in these critical areas can put at risk the very security of our nation in a time of war," Ashcroft said in his first speech since his resignation became public Tuesday.

"These encroachments include some of the most fundamental aspects of the president's conduct of the war on terrorism," he told the Federalist Society, a conservative lawyers group with close ties to the Bush administration.

The remarks seem to be inspired by Ashcroft's latest loss, a ruling by U.S. District Judge James Robertson of Washington that says only courts can declare people "enemy combatants" (and therefore not entitled to an open trial), not the President.

The problem is that Ashcroft's heir apparent to the AG post, Alberto Gonzalez, is considered to be the architect of most of the strategy of trying those accused of aiding al-Qaeda, including American citizens, as "enemy combatants" in secret military tribunals rather than conventional courts. He's also referred to the Geneva Convention as "quaint."

Here's an idea for Dubya: why not appoint an Attorney General who doesn't view the Constitution as a mere annoyance?

luckyride

Portland, OR

May 2003

NOV 15, 2004 01:25 PM

were they "activist" judges?

scottishrob

Olathe, KS

July 2003

NOV 15, 2004 01:36 PM

Oh I don't know, perhaps it might just be because a number of judges make decisions not based on the Constitution, but their personal opinions of it. I've been in a number of courtrooms and watched judges make some decisions that had NOTHING to do with anything in the Constitution. Fact of the matter is, judges push their own agenda and call it legal interpitation. I've seen it firsthand. The public safety doesn't matter to some judges, they have thier political ambisions.

Mind you I'm speaking of some judges; NOT ALL!!!!

Kundalini

Kalamazoo, MI

June 2004

NOV 15, 2004 01:41 PM

And now Powell resigns. So much for "moderates" in the administration...

ferret

I'm lost

OLD SKOOL

NOV 15, 2004 01:56 PM

scottishrob said:
Oh I don't know, perhaps it might just be because a number of judges make decisions not based on the Constitution, but their personal opinions of it.

yes, if by "a number of judges" you mean "all judges".

lostarchitect

Brooklyn, NY

January 2004

NOV 15, 2004 01:59 PM

beauty school dropout, go back to high school...

PointBlank

New York, NY

November 2004

NOV 15, 2004 02:01 PM

I thought the 'job of securing America from crime and terrorism' had been accomplished?!?!

Flip flopper!

Pav

I'm lost

February 2004

NOV 15, 2004 02:10 PM

I swear these damn courts are getting to be like a fourth branch of government.

Idjit

HOPEFUL

I'm lost

NOV 15, 2004 02:19 PM

Pav said:
I swear these damn courts are getting to be like a fourth branch of government.

Heh.

In other news - I can't wait for the photos of Ashcroft in drag to be released. You just know that someday that this guy is going to turn out being some horrible pervert or something. Like William Bennett and his little (multi-million dollar) gambling problem.

db291024

Bahamas

February 2004

NOV 15, 2004 02:48 PM

i've said it for ten years, and i still love saying it:

FUCK JOHN ASHCROFT.

googused

Portland, OR

OLD SKOOL

NOV 15, 2004 02:54 PM

You'd think one would be wary of the opinions of a guy who lost an election to a dead man.

MC_Dove

Cincinnati, OH

November 2004

NOV 15, 2004 03:27 PM

googuse said:
You'd think one would be wary of the opinions of a guy who lost an election to a dead man.

in the words of the mighty david cross:

"let's see...crazy right wing fundamentalist....or maggot infested corpse....gonna have to go with the corpse!"