HO WOULD George W. Bush appoint to the Supreme Court of the United States?
During the first presidential debate, Al Gore warned that Bush would appoint ''justices in the mold of [Antonin] Scalia and Clarence Thomas, who are known for being the most vigorous opponents of a woman's right to choose.''
Bush responded: Just check my record. As governor of Texas he has appointed four judges to the state's Supreme Court.
They are Greg Abbott, James Baker, Alberto Gonzales, and Deborah Hankinson - four of nine state supreme court judges.
In Texas judges typically run for election, but early resignations let Bush make the appointments. All have since been elected except for Gonzales, who just went through a primary and will be up for election in November.
The verdict? The Bush appointees are not right-wing extremists. They do not vote in blocs. And they are generally considered to be thoughtful and less conservative than other Texas judges.
Still, national voters should be concerned about several issues.
One is abortion, only a fraction of the state court's cases but crucial to the US Supreme Court. This year's rulings have largely touched on parental notification, which Texas law requires unless a minor can convince a court that she is mature and informed about the decision or that telling a parent would lead to physical, sexual, or emotional abuse or in other ways not be in her best interest.
The Texas Supreme Court has overturned lower courts - letting minors have abortions without telling parents. But dissents are common, prompting a Texas lawyer to say that some justices seem to be auditioning for an antiabortion spot on the US Supreme Court. Of Bush's appointees, Abbott has dissented, charging his colleagues with ignoring the Legislature's intentions.
State watchdog groups also have criticized pro-business rulings that harm workers and consumers. One example is Ford Motor v. Sheldon, a class-action lawsuit brought by owners of Ford vehicles with defective paint jobs. Lower courts accepted the vehicle owners as a legitimate class. The Supreme Court overturned the ruling.
Only Justice Baker dissented. But his reasons were damning. He argued that the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction in the case. In general, only lower courts decide on class actions. But in 1997, Texas passed a law giving the Supreme Court this right in automobile cases. Baker argued that this violated the Texas Constitution's ban on ''special laws'' that only benefit particular groups - in this case letting the car industry try to get relief.
Advocates concluded that, like others, the auto industry had bought justice by donating money to the campaigns of the governor, legislators, and judges.
The lesson for America's voters is to keep an eye on the big picture, asking what Bush's judicial appointments might mean not only for abortion, but on a range of issues that put the rights of individuals at stake.
