Sign in to comment!

Menu
Home

Geraldine Ferraro Reacts to Judge Alito's Nomination

This is a partial transcript of "The Big Story With John Gibson," October 31, 2005, that has been edited for clarity.

JOHN GIBSON, HOST: Joining us now for the Democratic side with her reaction to Judge Samuel Alito (search) 's Supreme Court nomination is former vice presidential candidate and FOX News political analyst Geraldine Ferraro. I saw you nodding out of the corner of my eye. Roe is it?

GERALDINE FERRARO, FOX NEWS POLITICAL ANALYST: Yeah, it is. And if you look, Trent Lott is a former colleague of mine when I was in the House, so I mean, I don't doubt that he is coming from his direction as being very honest in how he is going to be looking at this candidate. But you know, we've got 15 years of decisions by Judge Alito, and one of those decisions was the decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (search) in the state of Pennsylvania, in which he believes that when it comes to abortion, the woman should ask her husband's permission. It was reversed by the Supreme Court and it was found to be unconstitutional.

So we have some sort of an indication of the way he is going. He also said that Roe v. Wade (search) should not be the law of the land.

So I take a look at that, take a look at where he is on disability cases, on the Family Medical Leave Act (search). They have so much that they can go after.

GIBSON: But is there a situation where you really should save your breath? Because even if the Democrats decided to filibuster, the Republicans are anxious to blow that up?

FERRARO: Let me just say one thing and that's it. When you kept on saying, "Are people itching for a fight?" I don't think that that is so on either side. I do believe that the conservatives really want to be assured that whoever the nominee is — and it was — that's why they opposed Harriet Miers (search). They wanted a guarantee that that court is going to move to the right on virtually every single issue that they care about.

And so, it's not that they want to fight with Democrats and they're happy about this. This guy if he — I shouldn't refer to him as a guy — this federal judge, if he gets approved and moves up to the Supreme Court, he's going to move that court so far to the right, and it is going to be to the right for the next 20, 30, 40 years. I'm not going to be around to see that, but my children and my grandchildren are. And I think that that's the issue for a lot of Democrats as well and a lot of liberals.

You are looking at what's going to be happening on that court, which is the reason why they're going to say, OK, let me make sure that this judge really is looking — he is going to look at precedent, he is going to respect the courts and respect what has already been done. He is not going to be legislating, he is going to be following what's been ...

GIBSON: Not going to be legislating from the bench?

FERRARO: Well, and as much as they keep saying he's a strict constitutionalist ...

(CROSSTALK)

GIBSON: Yes, but isn't that the complaint about liberal judges?

FERRARO: Of course it is. That's what the complaint is on both sides. But whether you call it a strict constructionist and a constitutionalist, or you call it legislating, if they take a precedent and they flip it out, and they put their own views in, then that's in effect doing the same thing.

GIBSON: Let's just cut to the chase, to the very end right now.

FERRARO: Sure.

GIBSON: Is he going to be confirmed?

FERRARO: You know, it depends. I'll tell you what it depends on. You know those seven Republicans and seven Democrats who got together in the last ...

GIBSON: The gang of 14?

FERRARO: They got together, and that's how Priscilla Owens (search) and Janice Rogers Brown (search) were approved. They said, OK, this is a situation where we will work out a compromise on these two judges. But if there are extraordinary circumstances, then we will say, OK, a filibuster is OK. They are going to look at this candidate, and he's got a significant record to look at, to see whether or not these are extraordinary circumstances that would require or that would allow for a filibuster. And if they allow, if that group does, then the filibuster works. If it doesn't, then why would you do it if it's not going to work?

GIBSON: Geraldine Ferraro, thank you very much.

Content and Programming Copyright 2005 FOX News Network, L.L.C. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Transcription Copyright 2005 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.), which takes sole responsibility for the accuracy of the transcription. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No license is granted to the user of this material except for the user's personal or internal use and, in such case, only one copy may be printed, nor shall user use any material for commercial purposes or in any fashion that may infringe upon FOX News Network, L.L.C.'s and eMediaMillWorks, Inc.'s copyrights or other proprietary rights or interests in the material. This is not a legal transcript for purposes of litigation.

See the latest updates on the hottest midterm races from Fox News

Full Elections Coverage →

Keep up with all the 2014 races in

Coverage →