Peter Durkind wasn’t waiting to hear the name of President George Bush’s nominee to the Supreme Court.
The president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Houston and Southeast Texas was on the phone with people in his national office discussing strategy and possible names hours before the president would make his nominee known.
“A lot of people are anticipating this and anxious to see where this goes,” said Durkind, whose organization operates 10 family planning clinics in the region, including one in Dickinson. “The biggest issue for us is that these decisions affect the lives and health of women, and that is what we are concerned about.”
By the time Bush named John Roberts as his nominee, the electronic media world, including more than a half dozen blogs The Daily News referenced, had plenty to say about the high court nominee. Durkind, who had expected one of two different nominees was caught off guard.
“The only John Roberts I know is the anchor for CBS News,” said Durkind. “We were preparing for the Ediths (Clement or Jones).”
When told of a 1991 Roberts brief filed with the Supreme Court in Rust vs. Sullivan in which the nominee faulted Roe vs. Wade as “wrongly decided and should be overruled” Durkind was subdued.
“That is ominous (and) gives me no comfort,” he said.
Durkind said Planned Parenthood will put out an effort to “let the people know who (the nominee is)” and prevent what he considers could be “a conservative effort to roll back significant progress that has been made” in reproductive rights, including the right to an abortion.
While groups such as Planned Parenthood are preparing for the confirmation process, the public might not have been watching so closely.
“Most people do not realize the power of the Supreme Court or the weight of a Supreme Court decision,” said Galveston College history professor Sharon Sewell. “In some cases, it overturns or creates new law.”
A justice likely to “create new law” is exactly what former government professor Sid Young doesn’t expect to see.
“President Bush has said he would nominate someone who is not an activist from the bench,” said Young. “I believe that when people went to the polls, they knew this about (Bush) and that is why they voted for him.”
Whomever the president nominates, it is not expected to see the smoothest of confirmation processes.
That is not good for the country, said Friendswood resident Don Johnson.
“During the Ruth Bader Ginsburg confirmation and then again when Stephen Breyer was nominated to a position on the Supreme Court, conservative Republicans allowed President Clinton the latitude to choose whatever liberal justices he wanted to nominate,” said Johnson. “Democrats should now allow President Bush to nominate a justice of his choosing and only question the qualifications of such a candidate.”
