Roberts Set For Supreme Court Nomination

[dudden22]

This country just keeps getting worse.

[strandinthewind]

emphasis and commentary supplied:

Roberts demonstrates conservative credentials

WASHINGTON (AP) -- John G. Roberts has demonstrated strong backing for Bush administration policies, ruling against Geneva Conventions protections for detainees at Guantanamo Bay and in favor of keeping Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force records secret.

Roberts' record as a federal appeals court judge is short but clear, and he has a trail of solid conservative credentials dating back to the administration of President Bush's father.

Abortion rights groups say Roberts in a 1991 case tried to overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision legalizing abortion, during his days as a lawyer in the administration of President George H.W. Bush. Roberts helped write a brief that stated, "We continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled."

Pressed during his 2003 confirmation hearing for the appeals court for his own views on the matter, Roberts said: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There's nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

The brief that Roberts helped write in the 1991 case, Rust v. Sullivan, is "the obvious shot coming out of the box" against the nominee, said University of Chicago law school professor Dennis Hutchinson.

Hutchinson said the obvious defense for helping write the brief is that "I was representing the government and that's what lawyers do -- represent their clients."

Roberts voted with a unanimous three-member appeals court panel last Friday that put Bush's military tribunals in the war on terror back on track, clearing the way for the Pentagon to resume trials for detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The protections of the 1949 Geneva Conventions do not apply to al Qaeda and its members, so a former driver for Osama bin Laden does not have a right to its provisions, Judge A. Raymond Randolph said in an opinion joined by Roberts. [ Like it or not, they are correct here - the GC does not apply to Al-Q because Al-Q is not an army in a uniform representing a country, etc. I do think, however, that the US should have taken the higher road and treated these people with full protection granted to a nation's army under the GC ]

Lawyers representing the detainee complained that the ruling in which Roberts joined "is contrary to 200 years of constitutional law." [ They are legally wrong and they know it ]

Roberts issued a dissent in a preliminary decision against the Bush administration's efforts to keep secret records of Cheney's energy task force. Roberts was in the minority when the court voted 5-3 to deny the Bush administration's request for a rehearing. However, the Supreme Court upheld the administration position on a 7-2 vote and the appeals court subsequently implemented the Supreme Court decision with an 8-0 vote. [ Can you say LAPDOG - there is absolutely NO reason Cheney's crooked brother in law deals should be kept secret - none whatsoever ]

Roberts is a member of the conservative Federalist Society, which has influenced Bush's judicial picks. [ The Federalist Society is not per se far right wing conservative as almost every Federal Judge I can think of is in it, though I suspect the vast majority of its active members are conservative ]

Bush called him "one of best legal minds of his generation." [ Pretty much all sources agree on this - I could find no one in the know who will comment against this guy's personable nature and legal intellect ]

Roberts is a familiar face at the Supreme Court, where he clerked for then-associate Supreme Court Justice William H. Rehnquist and later argued many cases, both for the government and as a private lawyer. He was associate counsel to President Reagan from 1982-86 and served as principal deputy solicitor general in the administration of the first President Bush from 1989-93 before returning to private practice. [ This shrieks conservative political appointee and this IMO is the most damning thing for people who want the right to privacy upheld ]

As a private lawyer, the Buffalo, New York, native represented Toyota at the Supreme Court, winning limits on disabled workers' claims. [ He was representing a client and in many ways and IMO he was correct in this - though certainly not in all - comp. sucks IMO and is greatly abused - I mean when a person can get several hundred thousand tax free dollars for a minor injury and then return to work a few years later - well that just is not right IMO ]

He also joined in a decision last year to throw out a $959 million judgment for U.S. prisoners of war who say they were tortured by the Iraqi military during the 1991 Gulf War, ruling that Congress never authorized such lawsuits against foreign governments. [ From what I have seen Congress, not Roberts, was the culprit here, though I have not read all the facts ]

Liberals are unhappy with a number of his decisions, though he has not always stayed on a narrowly conservative path.

At the appeals court, he won hearings for welfare recipients whose benefits had been terminated.

To liberals' dismay, Roberts issued a dissent in a case involving the constitutionality of the Endangered Species Act. The group People for the American Way said Roberts' dissent indicated he may be ready to join the ranks of right-wing conservative judges who seek to severely limit congressional authority to protect the environment.

Supreme Court historian David Garrow of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, said that while Roberts is a conservative, he is not in the mold of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

"I do not think it moves the court at all," Garrow said. [ I agree as really only three Justices as of now want to overrule Roe and the right to provacy cases and one of those really might not do it if pushed ]

On the other hand, University of Chicago law professor David A. Strauss thinks Roberts will alarm Democrats because of his reputation as a conservative.

As an example, Strauss pointed to a brief Roberts wrote stating public high schools can include religious ceremonies in their graduation programs, a view the Supreme Court rejected. Roberts authored the brief while working with the solicitor general's office, under Kenneth Starr, on behalf of the first Bush administration. [ Again, that was advocacy on behalf of a client and that is a minor issue on the whole church and state sep. issue IMO ]

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/....ap/index.html
______________________________________________________

In the end, I think this guy is a religious conservative and I do not trust him. I would rather not have him on The Court and hope the D's fight him, which they probably will not. However, he is far from the worst thing that could have been nominated given the far religious right crazies that are in vogue right now.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by dudden22

This country just keeps getting worse.

Hop in bed, here's a drink. It will get better, I just wish it were sooner. Call your senators!

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by irishgrl

How about George Miller? Democrat from Contra Costa County in CA...Amber should know about him, I really admire this guy

I was also thinking about Bernie Sanders but didn't have the time to do any research on him. Bernie's not a Democrat though. He's an Independent.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

True Majority set up this great link to send a message to your senators to vote against Roberts.

http://action.truemajority.org/campa...emeCourtAction

You can edit the already written email. Even better, once you send it, you can print it out and it will be automatically formatted as a letter from you to your senator! Please send letters. Also send faxes and make phone calls, especially if you live in a red state but even blue staters need to make sure their voices are heard.

Done. Thanks!

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

Kennedy. Except he's such a self-parody that is often overlooked, but he does have some cajones.

I watched Schumer and Leahy's full press conference on CSPAN after screaming at the television intemittently during Dumbya's 7 minute speech.
In summary what they said was that they don't like the fact that he's been on the bench for such a short time and that he'll have to satisfactorily answer questions.
I love Leahy's style and was especially impressed with Schumer. Now we just have to hope that they mean what they say.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by dudden22

This country just keeps getting worse.

If Rove goes down, along with others in the west wing then we've got a shot. The 2006 mid term elections are also crucial in that we need a Democratic majority back in the House Of Representatives so that we can restore some semblance of a balance of power.
There is always hope.

[GypsySorcerer]

Roberts Likely Won't Face Filibuster
By JESSE J. HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee John Roberts likely will not face a Democratic filibuster, Senate centrists who brokered a deal to expedite judgeship candidates said Thursday. "So far, so good," one Democrat acknowledged.

While the group of 14 Democratic and Republican senators said they were reserving official judgment until after confirmation hearings, Sen. Mike DeWine (news, bio, voting record) said there was agreement that Roberts' resume doesn't show the "extraordinary circumstances" that would meet a threshold for a Democratic filibuster.

"There's no indications so far that there will be a filibuster, and I think that was the consensus in the meeting," said DeWine, R-Ohio. "But I think people are reserving the right to see what comes out of the hearings."

Said Sen. John Warner (news, bio, voting record), R-Va.: "This is a confirmation process, not a coronation."

President Bush, meanwhile, said he appreciates the reception Roberts has received so far in the Senate, where the nominee continued meetings with individual senators Thursday.

"I want to thank the senators from both political parties who are giving Judge Roberts the chance to talk about his heart, talk about his philosophy," Bush said during remarks to the Organization of American States. "He is a person that'll make all Americans proud" if he is confirmed for a seat on the high court.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan, asked later whether the president thinks there are enough votes to confirm Roberts, said it was too soon to get into the business of counting heads.

"I think it's way too early in the process to start trying to get into vote counting, or anything of that nature," McClellan said.

Some Democrats indicated that they don't see Roberts, a 50-year-old Republican lawyer-turned-judge as the kind of right-wing candidate they feared Bush would select.

"This is a credible nominee, and not one that — as far as we know now — has a record that in any sense could be described as extremist," said Sen. Joseph Lieberman (news, bio, voting record), D-Conn. Sen. Ben Nelson (news, bio, voting record), D-Neb., said Bush had "made a wise choice."

Asked whether a filibuster was likely, Nelson said: "I think it's fair to say I don't see anything coming out right now."

"My sense is so far, so good," summed up Sen. Mark Pryor (news, bio, voting record), D-Ark.

Meanwhile, an AP-Ipsos poll out Thursday said more than half of Americans, 52 percent, said they thought Roberts should have to state his position on abortion before he is confirmed, with women more interested than many in knowing his stance. Most of those surveyed — 59 percent — said they haven't heard enough about Roberts to form an opinion about him personally, while 25 percent viewed him favorably and 14 percent unfavorably.

Majority Republican senators have been unfailingly admiring of Roberts since Bush announced the nomination Tuesday night. Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., the Judiciary Committee chairman, said Thursday that Roberts is "a non-activist judge, which everyone is looking for."

After meeting Roberts, committee member Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said: "He's the type of guy you'd want to live next door to."

Roberts also was meeting Thursday with two of his biggest Senate critics, Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Charles Schumer of New York. They are among three Democrats who voted against Roberts's nomination to the federal appeals court.

Roberts will meet with the third, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Senate's no. 2 Democrat, on Friday.

Even though Democrats are uncertain about Roberts' judicial philosophy, not a single Democratic senator has called for the conservative jurist's outright rejection. There also has been no public talk of trying to block a yes or no vote.

Other Democrats, however, said they weren't about to rubber stamp Bush's choice of a successor to Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

"No one is entitled to a free pass to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court," Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record), senior Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said Wednesday.

Abortion and access to internal government memos loomed as likely flash points as Democrats pointed toward the nationally televised proceedings, likely to begin after Labor Day.

Many Republicans members of the "Gang of 14," which helped avoid a confrontation over judges in May, have indicated support for Roberts.

"I think that Judge Roberts deserves an up-or-down vote, and I hope that the other members of that group agree with me," said Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), R-Ariz., a member.

Roberts didn't say much publicly Wednesday during a five-hour visit to the Capitol, except to praise the politicians who will vote on the first Supreme Court nomination in 11 years.

"I appreciate and respect the constitutional role of the Senate in the confirmation process," Roberts said after meeting with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Judiciary chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa.

Meanwhile, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who was at the fulcrum of early speculation as Bush's likely choice, said Thursday that Democrats shouldn't go to far in their questioning of Roberts.

Gonzales, appearing on CBS' "The Early Show," said questions about his approach to cases are appropriate. "But to inquire as to how someone is actually going to decide a case, I think, is inappropriate for a nominee to answer," he added.

As Roberts paid called on senators Wednesday, a conservative group bought TV ad time in support of his nomination. Abortion rights groups, meanwhile, protested at the Supreme Court and the Capitol.

Progress for America, a conservative group with ties to the administration, unveiled the opening salvo in an ad campaign designed to ensure confirmation. It stressed Roberts' resume of academic and professional accomplishments and public service — first in his class at Harvard Law School, confirmed by the Senate to his current position and lawyer in two presidential administrations.

[GypsySorcerer]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

In the end, I think this guy is a religious conservative and I do not trust him. I would rather not have him on The Court and hope the D's fight him, which they probably will not. However, he is far from the worst thing that could have been nominated given the far religious right crazies that are in vogue right now.

Well, Republican nominees are often a coin flip. There's no telling how they're going to be on the bench. The scary thing is that Bush could nominate up to four justices.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by GypsySorcerer

Well, Republican nominees are often a coin flip. There's no telling how they're going to be on the bench. The scary thing is that Bush could nominate up to four justices.

To the victor belongs the spoils

[gldstwmn]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/20...over_owen.html

September 17, 2005
Reid Warns of Filibuster Over Owen
Robert Novak reports Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) "has informed" Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) "that Federal Appeals Court Judge Priscilla Owen will be filibustered if President Bush names her to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court.

"Republican senators are divided on whether former Texas Supreme Court Justice Owen is vulnerable because she underwent a filibuster for the appellate seat and was confirmed under the compromise agreement. Frist is known to believe Owen can be confirmed in the face of a filibuster.

"Republican Senate strategists believe Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is the only possible Bush nominee to replace O'Connor who would not face a filibuster."

The AP says President Bush "extended invitations Friday to key Senate leaders to meet at the White House next week to discuss the O'Connor's spot on the bench.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

The AP says President Bush "extended invitations Friday to key Senate leaders to meet at the White House next week to discuss the O'Connor's spot on the bench.

"Key Senate leaders" meaning prominent Republicans.