RSSJohn Roberts Passes Out of Committee to Full Senate for Aproval
To no ones surprise, John Roberts moved closer to his new position as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court today. 13 voted against his nomination, the hard left of the democratic party; Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.), Joseph Biden (Del.), Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) , Charles Schumer (N.Y.) and Dick Durbin (Ill.). The Democrats that voted for Roberts were Sens. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) , Herb Kohl (Wis.) and Russ Feingold (Wis.).
Nothing that happened today changed the overwhelming view that he will be confirmed in the Senate and available for swearing in before Oct. 3. The only remaining question is the margin of victory for Bush’s first Supreme Court nominee.
With little doubt about the outcome, the Roberts nomination has become more of a preliminary round to what may be a greater controversy over the president’s so-far-unannounced choice to replace O’Connor.
The assumption of Democrats and Republicans alike is that Roberts’s votes on the court will be comparable to Rehnquist’s, the conservative for whom Roberts clerked as a young man, and will therefore not immediately alter the disposition of cases.
The ABA Official Report on John Roberts
The American Bar Association, who has advised the Senate on Supreme Court Nominees for the past half century, has released their official statement on John Roberts. Attached is the official report presented to the Senate by Stephen Tober, head of the ABA’s Judicial Review Committee.
Rarely has a body come to the conclusion so unanimously regarding an individual. The report is a glowing testimony to John Roberts, the man and the judge.
To read the whole report, click here. (PDF FILE)
Some excerpts from the report. These are comments by the committee members regarding John Roberts on topics such as integrity, judicial temperment, and competence.
Integrity:
“He is probably the most honorable guy I know and he is a man of his word.”
“I would be amazed if anyone had any greater integrity on either a personal or professional level.”
“He’s a man of extraordinary integrity and character.”
“He is honest and straightforward and I do not have the slightest hesitation about any aspect of his integrity.”
On the basis of our interviews with Judge Roberts and with over three hundred judges, lawyers and others who know Judge Roberts professionally, the Standing Committee concluded that Judge Roberts is a man of impeccable integrity.
Judicial Temperment:
Stephen Tober, Chair of the ABA Judiciary Committee will Testify Thursday at Roberts Hearing
The Senate Judiciary Committee has been meeting the past week to determine whether to pass John Roberts to the full Senate as a candidate for the seat of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. They have spent the past 3 days interviewing Roberts, and determining whether he is worthy of the position.
On Thursday, the committee will hear from Stephen Tober, chairman of the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, who has given Judge John Roberts the highest rating, “Well Qualified”. Roberts will have the opportunity to present the findings of the ABA to the committee, and explain how they came up with this recommendation.
Stephen Tober is one of the most respected attorneys in the country, practicing out of Portsmouth, New Hampshire. He has a successful practice specializing in civil litigation, professional negligence, and domestic relations.
Tober’s resume is extensive, having served as president of the New Hampshire Trial Lawyers Association in 1977 and as member of the board of governors of The Association of Trial Lawyers of America from 1980-1986. He was a delegate to the New Hampshire Constitutional Convention in 1984 and on the New Hampshire Board of Bar Examiners from 1997-2000.
This path has led Stephen Tober to the seat he will take in front of the Senate tomorrow. He will have the opportunity to explain the grueling review that the ABA puts the nominees through, how they come to the rating they give them, and explain the ABA’s role in the process.
To read more on Stephen Tober, click here.
We will be having the opportunity to ask questions of Stephen Tober over the next week. If you are interested in asking a question, please visit this Topic in our Discussion Forum to add your thoughts.
What a Difference 12 Years Makes In the Senate Judiciary Committee
Today the Senate Judiciary met again to discuss the confirmation of John Roberts’ nomination as the nation’s chief justice. The distinguished Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware had a much different take on things today than he did 12 years ago. Rather interesting the change in complete philosophy of questioning comes about when a Democrat is confirming an ACLU lawyer to the Supreme Court vs. a Justice nominated by a Republican President.
Some how its reported that Roberts dodges the abortion question when it was OK for previous Justices not to answer questions posed to them in the past they they felt inappropriate. After continued questions of Roe V. Wade disguised to look like something different than the same question from Democrats came this exchange between Biden, Roberts and Specter:
An exchange between Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., John Roberts and Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa. after Biden prodded Roberts to say whether he agreed with a ruling in a specific case. Biden said Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had answered such questions in her confirmation hearing, but Roberts still declined to answer, saying the issue in the case could arise in the Supreme Court:
Biden: “… Judge, she (Ginsburg) specifically, in response to a question whether or not she agreed with the majority or minority opinion in Moore v. the City of Cleveland said explicitly: I agree with the majority, and here’s what the majority said and I agree with it. My question to you is: Do you agree with it or not?”
Roberts: “Well, I do know, Senator, that in numerous other cases — because I read the transcript…”
Biden: “So did I.”
Roberts: “… She took the position that she should not comment. Justice O’Connor took the same position. She was asked about a particular case.”
Biden: “Oh, Judge, Judge, Judge…”
Roberts: “She said, It’s not correct for me to comment. Now, there’s a reason for that.”
Biden: “But you’re going from the…”
Specter: “Wait a minute, Senator Biden. He’s not finished his answer.”
Biden: “He’s filibustering, Senator. But OK, go ahead.
Specter: “No, he’s not. No, he’s not.”
Roberts: “That’s a bad word, Senator.”
Biden: “That’s if we do it to you. Go ahead. Go ahead and continue not to answer.”
NOW FOR THE HYPOCRISY
All this would not be so comical and hypocritical on Biden’s part if it were not for this bit of history some 12 years earlier during Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s confirmation hearing. From Progress For America comes this
MUST SEE VIDEO.
“In 1993, Senator Biden counseled Ruth Bader Ginsburg not to prejudge cases and she complied, refusing to answer approximately 55 questions, including questions about public education, labor laws, abortion, and many other topics. Twelve years later, he insists that Ginsburg answered questions that she clearly did not and badgers Judge Roberts for following her lead. Just because Senator Biden realizes his advice is no longer politically expedient, it is dishonest, unfair and unacceptable for Biden to attempt to change the rules of the game for Judge Roberts.”
John Roberts on the Role of the Courts
In response to Dianne Feinstein’s question on the role of the courts in a case, John Roberts, the Supreme Court nominee stated.
I think courts have a limited role in general. They only interpret the law. They don’t make the law. They don’t shape the policy…
Click here for the video:
UPDATE: (AP): Excerpts From Roberts’ Hearing. Senator Biden’s childish antics. At times today I actually forgot I was watching grown men. John Roberts’ maintained a presence about him as others certainly did not.
An exchange between Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., John Roberts and Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa. after Biden prodded Roberts to say whether he agreed with a ruling in a specific case. Biden said Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg had answered such questions in her confirmation hearing, but Roberts still declined to answer, saying the issue in the case could arise in the Supreme Court:
Biden: “… Judge, she (Ginsburg) specifically, in response to a question whether or not she agreed with the majority or minority opinion in Moore v. the City of Cleveland said explicitly: I agree with the majority, and here’s what the majority said and I agree with it. My question to you is: Do you agree with it or not?”
Roberts: “Well, I do know, Senator, that in numerous other cases — because I read the transcript…”
Biden: “So did I.”
Read more
