Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Pull Me Under Your Weather Patterns


I have no idea what John Roberts is thinking today. It must be very intimidating and nerve-wracking to know that the entire nation is going to examine your opinions and viewpoints, but this is how it must be in our system. With a structure that allows for lifetime judicial appointments, there must sufficient scrutiny and examination of potential justices. It seems that Roberts is quite a Washington insider due to his service in the Reagan and Bush I Administrations, time as a partner in a prestigious D.C. law firm, and since 2003 his work as a member of the D.C. Federal Court of Appeals. President Bush's team probably saw this aspect of Roberts's personality as an advantage due to his prior confirmation by the Senate before he took his seat on the federal bench.

I see the largest potential roadblock to a potential appointment as the document that he signed in 1990 detailing the first Bush Administration's opposition to the Court's 1973 ruling in the landmark Roe v. Wade case. The memo stated that in their opinion Roe had been "wrongly decided and should be overruled." It is not clear whether this memo represents the explicit opinion of Roberts or whether he was simply projecting the opinion of the administration that he was representing. It is almost certain that such an explicit statement on a divisive issue like abortion will be one of the major points of contention in the Senate confirmation hearings.

Here is a link to a NY Times story detailing the reaction of Senators on both sides of the aisle to the new nomination.

Current Listening: "Leaving Through the Window" by Something Corporate.

2 Comments:

At 8:55 PM, Blogger Prosso said...

I don't think his '90 abortion comment will be an actual big deal. Lawyers say a lot of things when they are paid enough. Probably some noise will be made from Dems and lobbyists but nothing serious. He was later quoted as saying Roe v Wade was "set law" or something along those lines.

Roberts is in with no filibuster or real fuss.

 
At 11:05 PM, Blogger Jonathan said...

Yea, if I'm not mistaken Roberts said during his confirmation hearings for the his current seat on the appeals court that nothing in his personal preference would cause him to rule against the established law of the land.

After all the talk about litmus tests in the last presidential election, I think we're about to find out just which senators have a litmus test for the Supreme Court.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home