(This in-depth look at the strong-arm rulings and stances of Alberto Gonzales was originally written when U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement)
On July 16, 2005, President Bush described his eventual nominee to replace US Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor as one who "will meet the highest standards of intellect, character and ability and will pledge to faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of our country."
Although Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito were eventually the Bush Administration's choices to fill Court vacancies, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has not been ruled out by President Bush as a future nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Conservatives & Liberals on Gonzales
With his hardscrabble Mexican immigrant roots, self-financed Harvard Law degree, sharp intelligence and respected, albeit brief, judicial record, Gonzales could conceivably fit the President's nominee description.
A 2001 Washington Post article recounts Gonzales' friends and former law partners as regarding him as a pro-business fiscal conservative who is more moderate on social issues.
Activist Phyllis Schafly spoke for many ultra-conservatives when she said, "I don't see any paper trail that convinces me he is...a strong constitutionalist." And one conservative publisher branded Gonzales as "a judicial activist of the worst kind." But Kay Daly of the conservative Coalition for a Fair Judiciary comments, "...there are organizations who have concerns, and those who do not have concerns."
Liberal groups have largely remained mum on a potential Gonzales nomination. In early July 2005, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said "Alberto Gonzales is qualified. He's attorney general of the United States and a former Texas judge," although Reid voted against confirmation of Gonzales as Attorney General.
Gonzales' Political & Legal Career
The "paper trail" of Gonzales' judicial rulings and personal stances is scant and sketchy on hot-button issues certain to be addressed by the Supreme Court, as Gonzales was a judge for only two years, as a Texas Supreme Court Justice from 1999 to 2001. (He was initally appointed by Governor Bush, and ran for reelection in 2000.)
Another reason for little evidence of Gonzales' judicial philosophy is that the Texas Supreme Court handles only civil and juvenile cases, and most of his opinions related to business cases.
From 1982 to 1995, Gonzales worked his way to partner in a Texas law firm connected to the oil & gas industry, where he specialized in business transactions such as mergers/acquisitions, corporate finance and real estate. He served as then-Governor George Bush's legal counsel from 1995 to 1997 and Texas Secretary of State from 1997 to 1999.
Gonzales resigned the Texas bench in 2001 to follow George Bush to Washington as White House legal counsel. Alberto Gonzales became the Bush Administration's Attorney General in 2005.
Gonzales' Judicial Ideology and Philosophy
Newspapers, magazines and various groups have recently attempted to stitch together a comprehensive look at the potential judicial ideology and philosophy of Alberto Gonzales.
The most notable of these is a white paper published by the ACLU in January 2005, "The Civil Liberties and Civil Rights Record of Attorney General Nominee Alberto Gonzales."
The following is a summary of Gonzales'utterances and writings, and brief excerpts from various papers, articles and analyses, created to give a quick snapshot of past Gonzales positions and rulings on high-profile issues.
Affirmative Action
"If affirmative action is quotas, then I am not for it. If it means equal opportunity, then I say support that. But to ask for special treatment because of race, that bothers me....My own personal feelings about affirmative action are not indicative of how I might rule on affirmative action if I were ever given the opportunity to rule on it from the bench again." Alberto Gonzales quote in July 2001 in Washington Post.
Gonzales is said to have squabbled with conservatives in the Bush administration in 2003 in formulating a federal stance on the University of Michigan admission policy Supreme Court case. Gonzales argued that the administration should not take a hard-line position in favor of the white students claiming "reverse racial-discrimination."
Abortion
In a February 2000 Texas Supreme Court case, Gonzales dismissed a charge that the majority erred in granting latitude for a teen seeking judicial approval to bypass a state law requiring parental notification prior to an abortion.
Wrote Gonzales in his opinion, "...the general rule of notification should be very rare and require a high standard of proof." He added, "While the ramifications of such a law and the results of the Court's decision here may be personally troubling to me as parent, it is my obligation as a judge to impartially apply the laws of this state without imposing my moral view on the decisions of the Legislature."
