Ralph G. Neas Quotes

Many voters think about the makeup of the Supreme Court when they are choosing a president. The justices deal not only with constitutional issues but also with social issues that were unknown to the founding fathers who wrote the Constitution more than 200 years ago.

Roosevelt got a chance to name an amazing nine justices of the Supreme Court. He was not namby-pamby on this question. He wanted people who shared his views, he wanted liberals, and he wanted lots of them.

My feeling is that the judge has a responsibility to the Constitution first, precedent second. Precedent is one factor. It is not the only factor. If it was the only factor, then, you know, we wouldn't have had Roe vs. Wade. We wouldn't have had Griswold. We wouldn't have had Lawrence. We wouldn't have had all these cases which the Left love.

Conservative voters increasingly understand that the one legacy a president can leave is his judicial appointments.

Having been on the front lines of the confirmation battles involving Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito, I know firsthand what is at stake when the Senate exercises its 'advise and consent' power over federal judges.

Obama and Biden want a bench crammed full of liberal judicial activists, and it's up to the American people to tell them 'no.'

To hear both critics and defenders talk about the fitness of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court, you'd think the most successful Supreme Court justices had been warm, collegial consensus-builders. But history tells a different story.

I'm looking for a Justice who appreciates the awesome responsibility that she will be given, if confirmed. A Justice who understands the gravity of the office and who respects the very different roles that the Constitution provides for each of the three branches of government.

Judge Roberts has assured me personally that he has a healthy respect for precedent and the hard-won rights of Americans.

Over the course of 19 years on the Supreme Court, I learned some lessons about the Constitution of the United States.

The place to find the explanation for the liberal-activist mindset of the courts is in the political arena.

The liberals are fighting so hard whenever President Bush appoints any federal judges.

The Supreme Court has made itself into a political institution … It has become a political prize and a political position.

Our Constitution was not written in the sands to be washed away by each successive wave of new judges blown in by each successive political wind.

The real difficulty is not with the Constitution but with the judges who interpret it.

No matter whether th' Constitution follows th' flag or not, the Supreme Coort follows th' iliction returns.

The base that Marshall built in law, and in tradition, transcends his life and animates the rest of American history. Part of the genius of John Marshall, is that in a very real sense, he invented the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court does not get very reckless very often.

I don’t see why a Supreme Court justice has to have previous experience as a judge.

A Supreme Court justice is sometimes a liberal on one issue and a conservative on another.

The perception of the Supreme Court as a political court in most constitutional cases and many nonconstitutional ones derives from the fact that the justices form confident views without any empirical basis for them.

The Supreme Court of the United States is too important to our democracy for it to be understaffed for partisan reasons.

The American people have made clear that they want justices who have proven records of judicial restraint - exactly the kind of justices that Obama and Biden cannot abide.

The Democrats' drive to defeat Neil Gorsuch is the latest battle in a 50-year war for control of the Supreme Court - a war that began with a conspiracy against Richard Nixon by Chief Justice Earl Warren, Justice Abe Fortas and Lyndon Johnson.

The American people should be the one to decide which direction the Supreme Court will go.