New US Supreme Court Justice nominee

Real Life Events.

Go off topic and I will break you!

Moderator: Dictators in Training

New US Supreme Court Justice nominee

Postby Narrock » Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:58 pm

WASHINGTON - President Bush chose federal appeals court judge John G. Roberts Jr. on Tuesday as his first nominee for the Supreme Court, selecting a rock solid conservative whose nomination could trigger a tumultuous battle over the direction of the nation's highest court, senior administration officials said.

Bush offered the position to Roberts in a telephone call at 12:35 p.m. after a luncheon with the visiting prime minister of Australia, John Howard. He was to announce it later with a flourish in a nationally broadcast speech to the nation.

Roberts has been on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit since June 2003 after being picked for that seat by Bush.

Advocacy groups on the right say that Roberts, a 50-year-old native of Buffalo, N.Y., who attended Harvard Law School, is a bright judge with strong conservative credentials he burnished in the administrations of former Presidents Bush and Reagan. While he has been a federal judge for just a little more than two years, legal experts say that whatever experience he lacks on the bench is offset by his many years arguing cases before the Supreme Court.

Liberal groups, however, say Roberts has taken positions in cases involving free speech and religious liberty that endanger those rights. Abortion rights groups allege that Roberts is hostile to women's reproductive freedom and cite a brief he co-wrote in 1990 that suggested the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 high court decision that legalized abortion.

"The court's conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion ... finds no support in the text, structure or history of the Constitution," the brief said.

In his defense, Roberts told senators during his 2003 confirmation hearing that he would be guided by legal precedent. "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

While he doesn't have national name recognition, Roberts is a Washington insider who has worked over the years at the White House, Justice Department and in private practice.

In the Reagan administration, Roberts was special assistant to the attorney general and associate counsel to the president. Between 1989 and 1993, he was principal deputy solicitor general,the government's second highest lawyer who argues cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the early 1980s, Roberts was a clerk for Rehnquist before Reagan elevated the retiring jurist to the top chair in 1986.

It was Rehnquist who presided over the swearing-in ceremony when Roberts took his seat on the appeals court for the District of Columbia. It took a while for Roberts to get on the bench. He was nominated for the court in 1992 by the first President Bush and again by the president in 2001. The nominations died in the Senate both times. He was renominated in January 2003 and joined the court in June 2003.

Roberts' nomination to the appellate court attracted support from both sites of the ideological spectrum. Some 126 members of the District of Columbia Bar, including officials of the Clinton administration, signed a letter urging his confirmation. The letter said Roberts was one of the "very best and most highly respected appellate lawyers in the nation" and that his reputation as a "brilliant writer and oral advocate" was well deserved.

"He has been a judge for only two years and authored about 40 opinions, only three of which have drawn any dissent," said Wendy Long, a lawyer representing the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, adding that his record appears to suit Bush's desire to nominate a judge who will apply the law, as written, and leave policy decisions to the elected branches of government.


Well, that owns. :bowdown: :band: :boots: :balloons:
Narrock
NT Patron
NT Patron
 
Posts: 16679
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: Folsom, CA

Postby Phlegm » Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:10 pm

More on Roberts from ABC news:


Bush appointee John G. Roberts Jr., 50, was confirmed to a judgeship on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 2003, and was sworn in by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, whom he had previously served as a law clerk.

Despite being called the "best Supreme Court advocate of his generation," there had been speculation that Roberts' lack of time on a federal bench — and thus his relatively small paper trail — might scare Bush away from nominating him to the Supreme Court, but that was proven not to be an issue.

Born in Buffalo, N.Y., Roberts is a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard Law School who argued 39 cases before the Supreme Court and won 25. He was a partner with Hogan & Hartson in Washington, D.C, where he developed a civil litigation practice, with an emphasis on appellate matters.

Roberts was principal deputy solicitor general under President George H.W. Bush, who first nominated him for the D.C. Circuit Court in 1992. He was opposed by Democrats and never received a vote. He was re-nominated in 2001, and his nomination languished until a third nomination by Bush in 2003, when he won unanimous confirmation.

He also was special assistant to U.S. Attorney General William French Smith and served as associate White House counsel for four years under President Ronald Reagan.

While deputy solicitor general, Roberts co-signed a brief in Rust v. Sullivan that argued for a ban on federal money for clinics that provided abortions, counseled women about the procedure or referred them to a facility for an abortion. The brief went further than the question presented in the case, arguing that "we continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled."

In a second abortion-related case, Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, Roberts signed a "friend of the court" brief arguing that Operation Rescue was not engaged in a conspiracy to deprive women of their constitutional rights.

Roberts co-authored a brief that argued in favor of clergy-led prayer at public school graduations. The case was Lee v. Weisman, and the government lost.

Roberts also co-authored a brief supporting a law that criminalized flag burning. The government lost, and justices including conservative Antonin Scalia voted against the law.

In his role on the Court of Appeals, Roberts wrote the unanimous decision for a three-judge panel rejecting the civil rights claims brought on behalf of a 12-year-old girl who had been handcuffed, arrested and taken away by police for eating one French fry in the D.C. Metro.

He also wrote a dissent from the decision of the full D.C. Circuit not to reconsider a ruling concerning the constitutionality of the Endangered Species Act as it applied to a real estate development project.

And Roberts was criticized by veterans of the Iraq War for his dissenting opinion in a lawsuit brought by 17 American soldiers against Iraq and Saddam Hussein for torturing them during the Gulf War. Roberts said the federal courts did not have jurisdiction over the case.

In private practice, Roberts represented 19 states that, along with the federal government, sought to break up Microsoft Corporation. Many of the state attorneys general were Democrats.

Roberts is a practicing Catholic. He and his wife, Jane, have two children.


Mindia, take note of that last line.
Phlegm
Nappy Headed Ho
Nappy Headed Ho
 
Posts: 6258
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:50 pm

Postby Narrock » Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:11 pm

Roberts is a practicing Catholic. He and his wife, Jane, have two children.


Hey, nobody's perfect...
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Narrock
NT Patron
NT Patron
 
Posts: 16679
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: Folsom, CA

Postby Arlos » Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:15 pm

I have doubts he'll get confirmed. If he'd appointed a moderate, which is the role O'Conner filled, it would have sailed through. A far-right conservative, now that's not going to fly so easily, especially since it would completely flip the balance of the court. I predict a long and VERY acrimonious process.

-Arlos
User avatar
Arlos
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:39 pm

Postby Jimmy Durante » Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:16 pm

Mindia wrote:
Roberts is a practicing Catholic. He and his wife, Jane, have two children.


Hey, nobody's perfect...


Mindia wrote:Catholics should be banned onto an island somewhere far away from us. That would actually solve a lot of problems.
Jimmy Durante
NT Veteran
NT Veteran
 
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 5:42 pm
Location: Otisburg

Postby Narrock » Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:19 pm

Jimmy Durante wrote:
Mindia wrote:
Roberts is a practicing Catholic. He and his wife, Jane, have two children.


Hey, nobody's perfect...


Mindia wrote:Catholics should be banned onto an island somewhere far away from us. That would actually solve a lot of problems.


I was just saying that to piss off Lyion because he changed my sig. I'm looking at the fact that Roberts is a right-winger and that's what is going to make it possible for proper decisions to come out of that court. I hope he gets the position.
Narrock
NT Patron
NT Patron
 
Posts: 16679
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: Folsom, CA

Postby Phlegm » Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:25 pm

It will be an interesting confirmation process. Maybe it will get as good as the Clarence Thomas' one.
Phlegm
Nappy Headed Ho
Nappy Headed Ho
 
Posts: 6258
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:50 pm

Postby Gidan » Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:15 pm

I think the confirmation is going to be harder then Bush expects, though I expect he will get through.
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
User avatar
Gidan
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 2892
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 11:01 am

Postby Lyion » Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:21 pm

He's a slam dunk.

Not only will he be rapidly confirmed, I doubt anyone but the far left whacko's Schumer, Kennedy, and a few others will vote against him straight up.

Another Catholic on the Supreme Court.. You may want to go read Scalia some, Mindia. Maybe some of his intellect will rub off on you.

http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc ... s-politics
Lieberman is one of the "Gang of 14," seven Democrats and seven Republicans who in May broke a Senate deadlock by agreeing not to filibuster judicial nominees except in "extraordinary circumstances." . . .

Lieberman offered reporters Wednesday three names he said could be considered without sparking a talk-athon. He would not say whether he brought them up to Rove.

He said federal appellate Judges Michael McConnell and John G. Roberts were "in the ballpark," and that "people tell me" appeals court Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson is "very similar."
What saves a man is to take a step. Then another step.
C. S. Lewis
User avatar
Lyion
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 14376
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:42 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby Phlegm » Tue Jul 19, 2005 8:51 pm

Reaction to the nomination from cnn.com:

Early reaction to news that President Bush has nominated Judge John Roberts Jr. to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court portends a partisan fight.

Brian McCabe, president of conservative group Progress for America, opined that Roberts is "a man of great character who deserves genuine consideration and not automatic attacks and partisan indignation."

But a spokesman for Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid was less enthusiastic, saying Roberts has "suitable legal credentials." Spokesman Jim Manley said Roberts, once a law clerk for Justice William Rehnquist, "needs to demonstrate to the Senate that he has a commitment to core American values of freedom, equality and fairness."

Roberts sits on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. A veteran appellate attorney, he has argued more than 30 cases before the Supreme Court, in private practice and as deputy solicitor general during the administration of Bush's father, former President George H.W. Bush.

Former Texas Supreme Court Justice Sen. John Cornyn, a Republican member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, described Roberts as "an exceptional judge, brilliant legal mind, and a man of outstanding character who understands his profound duty to follow the law."

Similarly, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Republican from Tennessee, commended the president on his choice.

"Judge Roberts is the kind of outstanding nominee that will make America proud. He embodies the qualities America expects in a justice on its highest court -- someone who is fair, intelligent, impartial and committed to faithfully interpreting the Constitution and the law."

People for the American Way issued a statement expressing dissatisfaction with Bush's recommendation.

"We're extremely disappointed that the president did not choose a consensus nominee in the mold of Sandra Day O'Connor," the advocacy group's statement read. "Replacing O'Connor with someone who is not committed to upholding Americans' rights, liberties, and legal protections would be a constitutional catastrophe."

Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice, questioned Roberts' judicial philosophy.

"Given the administration's track record of selecting ideologically driven, divisive candidates for the bench, it would be unsurprising if Judge Roberts embraces a judicial philosophy that is insensitive to the rights and protections that ... have brought us closer to realizing the twin ideals of freedom and equality," she said in a statement from the national association of advocacy groups.

Bush's nomination came as a disappointment to the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.

"We are saddened that President Bush chose the politics of conflict and division over bipartisan consensus," the civil rights coalition said in a statement. "At first blush, John Roberts may not appear to be an ultra right judicial activist, but his approach to issues of protecting the rights and freedoms of individual Americans are, at best, unclear and, in some instances, deeply troubling."

Yet House Majority Whip Roy Blunt said he looks forward to seeing Roberts on the high court soon.

"Roberts ... has proven himself as a judge who applies the law impartially with an eye toward the strict interpretation of the Constitution, rather than legislating from the bench," Blunt said. "The Senate confirmed Judge Roberts to the circuit court just two years ago. I look forward to a swift and deliberate confirmation process this fall."
Phlegm
Nappy Headed Ho
Nappy Headed Ho
 
Posts: 6258
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:50 pm


Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron