Bush chooses Judge Roberts for Supreme Court

MrBishop

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush chose conservative appeals court judge John Roberts on Tuesday as his first nominee to the Supreme Court, igniting what could be a fierce partisan clash over his drive to move the closely divided court to the right.

With Roberts at his side, Bush appealed for a "dignified confirmation process" and a timely vote by the Senate. Bush sought to cast Roberts as a bipartisan choice with the right legal background and "a good heart," hoping to avoid the bitter Senate battles that blocked 10 of his most conservative nominees to lower courts during his first term.

At 50 years of age, Roberts could put Bush's stamp on the court for decades to come if he is confirmed by the Senate.

A solidly conservative Republican, Roberts would replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman on the high court and a moderate conservative who often controlled the outcome on issues such as abortion, affirmative action and civil liberties.

Senate Democrats voiced concern about Roberts' record and promised a full review. "No one is entitled to a free pass to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court," said Sen. Patrick Leahy, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Abortion rights groups seized on a brief he co-wrote in 1990 that suggested the Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion should be overturned. The American Civil Liberties Union expressed "deep concern" that Roberts, while serving as principal deputy solicitor general from 1989-1993, had backed the criminalization of flag burning as a form of political protest.



Roberts was part of a three-judge panel that handed Bush an important victory last week when it ruled that the military tribunals of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, could proceed. The treatment of prisoners there has been criticized by human rights groups and in the Arab world.

The quicker-than-expected decision on a replacement for retiring O'Connor could help the White House deflect attention from a growing controversy over the role of Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, in leaking a covert CIA operative's identity, Republican strategists said. Administration officials said Rove was not a factor in the timing of the announcement.
Click to expand...
More

So...anyone care to pontificate as to how Roberts' addition to the Supreme Court will affect laws in the next 30 years or so?
 
Before yesterday, I knew jack about this guy. From what I've heard and read, he's a conservative in his personal life but is a fair judge who can ignore his personal beliefs if they conflict with the law of the land. Exactly what a good judge should do. If liberals fight this, it's just to pick a fight.
 
It only takes 5 sane democrats to keep this thing on track. There seem to be 7 sane senators on each side of the isle, so there is hope.
 
I find this amazing. Do the dems actually think he's going to nominate an ultra-lib or what? Wake up, Bush is conservative. Chances are he's going to nominate a conservative judge. It's the way it works, the president at the time gets to nominate the guy or gal to the bench.
 
rulez.gif


a middle-grounder would be nice...but that's a bit too much to ask for.
 
When there are middle ground answers to problems, then you can have middle ground nominees. So far, all issues are based upon yes/no... positive/negative... for/against. Theres no middle ground per se. All the court can do is hand down a decision that is baflfing and unenforcable. Thats where the neutrality lies.
 
I see now that we're campaigning on TV for Supreme Court Judgeship. I have to think the framers of the constitution are collectively spinning in their graves. *sigh* Remember when this used to be America?
 
chcr said:
I see now that we're campaigning on TV for Supreme Court Judgeship. I have to think the framers of the constitution are collectively spinning in their graves. *sigh* Remember when this used to be America?
Click to expand...



It was before my time Chic. So I am sorry I dont remember. But I agree our forefathers would be spinning in their graves.
 
The quicker-than-expected decision on a replacement for retiring O'Connor could help the White House deflect attention from a growing controversy over the role of Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, in leaking a covert CIA operative's identity, Republican strategists said.
Click to expand...

Good Lord! No one believes that, do they???

Besides,

journalist Judith Miller of the New York Times
IS in jail!
 
Professur said:
Then would you mind not waving the corpse about? It's starting to smell bad.
Click to expand...

Some of us think it is still capable of being revived.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top