Progressive. Queer. Feminist. Opinionated.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Judge John G. Roberts Nominated

Roberts just made mention of preserving the "institutes of our democracy."

I think we all know what this means.

Transcript of Bush's announcement and Robert's response:

Roberts said:

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you very much. It is both an honor and very humbling to be nominated to serve on the Supreme Court.

Before I became a judge my law practice consisted largely of arguing cases before the court. That experience left me with a profound appreciation for the role of the court in our constitutional democracy, and a deep regard for the court as an institution.

I always got a lump in my throat whenever I walked up those marble steps to argue a case before the court. And I don’t think it was just from the nerves.

I am very grateful for the confidence the president has shown in nominating me. And I look forward to the next step in the process before the United States Senate.

It’s also appropriate for me to acknowledge that I would not be standing here today if it were not for the sacrifice and help of my parents, Jack and Rosemary Roberts, my three sisters, Cathy, Peggy and Barbara, and, of course, my wife, Jane. And I also want to acknowledge my children, my daughter, Josie, my son, Jack, who remind me every day why it’s so important for us to work to preserve the institutions of our democracy.

Thank you again very much.

Basic Information

NOW (National Organization for Women) has some information up.

Oh, and the HRC is getting up in arms, too.

And Dean has now said:

"It is disappointing that when President Bush had the chance to bring the country together, he instead turned to a nominee who may have impressive legal credentials, but also has sharp partisan credentials that cannot be ignored.

"Democrats take very seriously the responsibility to protect the individual rights of all Americans and are committed to ensuring that ideological judicial activists are not appointed to the Supreme Court. The Senate Judiciary Committee will now have the opportunity to see if Judge Roberts can put his partisanship aside, and live up to a Supreme Court Justice's duty to uphold the rights and freedoms of every American and the promise of equal justice for all." (link)


Anonymous texasshiva said...

Here's some more information on Roberts in Wikipedia (these guys act fast):

Regarding Rust v Sullivan (500 US 173, 1991), Roberts said in a brief:

"We continue to believe that [Roe v. Wade (410 US 113, 1973)] was wrongly decided and should be overruled. As more fully explained in our briefs, filed as amicus curiae, in Hodgson v. Minnesota, 110 S. Ct. 2926 (1990); Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, 109 S. Ct. 3040 (1989); Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 476 U.S. 747 (1986); and City of Akron v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, 462 U.S. 416 (1983), the Court's conclusions in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion and that government has no compelling interest in protecting prenatal human life throughout pregnancy find no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution."

Interesting. From the other side, there is also no indication that government has a compelling interest in protecting prenatal human life throughout pregnancy anywhere in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution.

He's also member of the Federalist Society. Fun guy, this.

(Links are to FindLaw. Some cases as listed are now listed by SCOTUS citation.)

11:38 AM

Blogger Harper said...

texasshiva -

You win at posting stuff. Thanks so much! Glad to have you around this blog.

12:36 PM

Anonymous texasshiva said...

Thank you for posting this kind of piece and letting me indulge my love of linking.

1:57 PM

Anonymous vt_slayer said...

Not that I'm a huge Roberts fan, but I would point out that he was assigned to write the amicus brief in Rust vs. Sullivan on behalf of the Reagan Whitehouse. It may or may not represent his own feelings (I have a tendency to think it does) but the only person whose opinions we can be certain it represents is Ronal Reagan.

7:06 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home