Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BIOGRAPHY OF JUDGE JOHN G. ROBERTS -- a conservative for the USSC
USDOJ DOT GOV ^ | 7-19-2005

Posted on 07/19/2005 4:48:31 PM PDT by doug from upland

http://www.usdoj.gov/olp/robertsbio.htm

US Department of Justice Seal
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Legal Policy


 About Us

 

 

 Resources

 

 
Last Updated: 03/08/04

Home Judicial Nominations Contact Us DOJ


John G. Roberts
Biography

Mr. Roberts is the head of Hogan & Hartson’s Appellate Practice Group. He graduated from Harvard College, summa cum laude, in 1976, and received his law degree, magna cum laude, in 1979 from the Harvard Law School, where he was managing editor of the Harvard Law Review. Following graduation he clerked for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the following year for then-Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist.

Following his clerkship experience, Mr. Roberts served as Special Assistant to United States Attorney General William French Smith. In 1982 President Reagan appointed Mr. Roberts to the White House Staff as Associate Counsel to the President, a position in which he served until joining Hogan & Hartson in 1986. Mr. Roberts’ responsibilities as Associate Counsel to the President included counseling on the President’s constitutional powers and responsibilities, as well as other legal issues affecting the executive branch.

At Hogan & Hartson, Mr. Roberts developed a civil litigation practice, with an emphasis on appellate matters. He personally argued before the United States Supreme Court and the lower federal courts, participating in a wide variety of matters on behalf of corporate clients, trade associations, governments, and individuals.

Mr. Roberts left the firm in 1989 to accept appointment as Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States, a position in which he served until returning to the firm in 1993. In that capacity he personally argued before the Supreme Court and the federal courts of appeals on behalf of the United States, and participated in formulating the litigation position of the government and determining when the government would appeal adverse decisions. Mr. Roberts had general substantive responsibility within the Office of the Solicitor General for cases arising from the Civil and Civil Rights Divisions of the Justice Department, as well as from a variety of independent agencies.

Mr. Roberts has presented oral arguments before the Supreme Court in more than thirty cases, covering the full range of the Court’s jurisdiction, including admiralty, antitrust, arbitration, environmental law, First Amendment, health care law, Indian law, bankruptcy, tax, regulation of financial institutions, administrative law, labor law, federal jurisdiction and procedure, interstate commerce, civil rights, and criminal law.

Mr. Roberts is a member of the American Law Institute and the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, and has also received the Edmund J. Randolph Award for outstanding service to the Department of Justice. He is a member of the Bars of the District of Columbia, the United States Supreme Court, and various federal Courts of Appeals.


 FOIA   Privacy Policy 


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: johnroberts; roberts; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

1 posted on 07/19/2005 4:48:31 PM PDT by doug from upland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Are we sure we know he is a strong conservative??????


2 posted on 07/19/2005 4:49:25 PM PDT by Shaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Damn that was quick, dude!

Were you tipped off?


3 posted on 07/19/2005 4:50:52 PM PDT by nuffsenuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shaka

His roots go back to advising Ronald the great. That's promising.


4 posted on 07/19/2005 4:51:11 PM PDT by bleach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shaka
Are we sure we know he is a strong conservative??????
Oh yea!!! Yeehaw!!!
5 posted on 07/19/2005 4:52:00 PM PDT by golfboy (character is doing what is right, when no one is looking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nuffsenuff

Heard it on Mark Levin and just went to the bio section.


6 posted on 07/19/2005 4:52:27 PM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Anybody have an idea where he stands on Constitutional issues.

I know Levin supports him but?

7 posted on 07/19/2005 4:52:28 PM PDT by rocksblues (I support the war on terror)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shaka
Certainly appears he's a conservative. Plus, why would Dubya bother to take the heat that comes with nominating a white man if the guy wasn't even a real conservative?
8 posted on 07/19/2005 4:53:01 PM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

mmmm hmmmm... ;-)


9 posted on 07/19/2005 4:53:27 PM PDT by nuffsenuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: golfboy

Good!! Let the bloodbath begin!!! Bring it on!!!!!!!!


10 posted on 07/19/2005 4:54:06 PM PDT by Shaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Maybe Byrd will think this is the the nominee.

John Roberts

11 posted on 07/19/2005 4:54:30 PM PDT by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

"Following graduation he clerked for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the following year for then-Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist."

Clerking for Justice Rehnquist is a good sign, isn't it??


12 posted on 07/19/2005 4:55:20 PM PDT by Humal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
He doesn't sound "mainstream" but we'll see...
13 posted on 07/19/2005 4:55:41 PM PDT by agitator (...And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Right to life stance, anyone know?


14 posted on 07/19/2005 4:55:53 PM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

How did you come up with that so fast? Good job.


15 posted on 07/19/2005 4:56:35 PM PDT by crazyhorse691 ( Heaven on Earth is where the nearest Starbucks is 60 miles away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: agitator
Clerking for Justice Rehnquist is a good sign, isn't it??

Relax, take a deep breath and enjoy the moment. Bush promised a conservative. This guy is it.

16 posted on 07/19/2005 4:57:29 PM PDT by golfboy (character is doing what is right, when no one is looking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

He's very down on Roe v Wade.


17 posted on 07/19/2005 4:57:31 PM PDT by tiamat ("If some guy named Marduk calls, tell him I'm not home!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Shaka

I knew that he was more similar to Scalia than to Thomas, even if he dissented with Scalia in an article he wrote. Luttig was my name.


18 posted on 07/19/2005 4:58:04 PM PDT by alessandrofiaschi (NO GONZALES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

BTTT!


19 posted on 07/19/2005 4:58:35 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Why did Drudge have John C. Roberts? Levin knows him and is reading the things from this bio.


20 posted on 07/19/2005 4:58:40 PM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Can you sort of fill us in on Mark Levin's opinion of Roberts?


21 posted on 07/19/2005 4:59:10 PM PDT by YaYa123 (C.Hitchens Fan.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: golfboy

Former Deputy Solicitor for Kenneth Starr.

Associate White House counsel for four years under the Reagan Administration.

Overturning Roe was such a primary focus of the Reagan Administration's Justice Department that during an oral argument by the nominee to the Supreme Court a Justice asked, "Mr. Roberts, in this case, are you asking that Roe v. Wade be overruled?" His reply was, "No your honor, the issue doesn't even come up." To this the justice replied, "Well that hasn't prevented the Solicitor General from taking that position in prior cases."*

As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts argued in a brief before the Supreme Court that "we continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled. The Court’s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion...finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution."**

As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Operation Rescue and named individuals who routinely blocked access to clinics. The brief argued that the protesters’ behavior did not discriminate against women and that blockades and clinic protests were protected speech under the First Amendment. This case, Bray v. Alexandria Women's Health Clinic, spurred the Congress to enact the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act.

Lead counsel for Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Ky, Inc. v. Williams. The case involved a woman who was fired after asking Toyota for accommodations to do her job after being diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome. The court ruled that while this condition impaired her ability to work, it did not impair her ability to perform major life activities. Disability rights groups fear that this decision may erode the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Filed an amicus brief in Adarand v. Mineta in Oct. 2001, supporting a challenge to federal affirmative action programs. He also argued against Title IX as applied to the NCAA in NCAA v. Smith.
Sources:
* NARAL
** Brief for the Respondent at 13, Rust v. Sullivan, 500 US 173, 1991


22 posted on 07/19/2005 4:59:18 PM PDT by america-rules
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
From the DU: "That's all I need to know....we're screwed."

Brings a smile to your face, doesn't it? :-)
23 posted on 07/19/2005 4:59:30 PM PDT by NJ_gent (Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Well, he's not a Texan, but everything I've heard sounds good so far.


24 posted on 07/19/2005 4:59:38 PM PDT by hispanarepublicana (There will be no bad talk or loud talk in this place. CB Stubblefield.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tiamat

Is that the hippie down that's good or the real down as in not good?


25 posted on 07/19/2005 4:59:42 PM PDT by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

That's the question I want answered.

I daresay the response from Lard Ass Kennedy and his sewer rats will give us an answer.


26 posted on 07/19/2005 4:59:57 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher (The Great Ronald Reagan & John Paul II - Heaven's Dream Team!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

I've been around this forum for awhile ... if Doug From Upland is right ... it will be the first time in several years.


27 posted on 07/19/2005 5:01:38 PM PDT by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123
Levine is ecstatic. He said (paraphrasing) "Mr. President you made an excellent decision. We are ready to fight. We are locked and loaded. Bring it on!!!" Obviously expecting a tough senate battle
28 posted on 07/19/2005 5:02:17 PM PDT by slowhand520
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Previous Support
29 posted on 07/19/2005 5:02:57 PM PDT by F-117A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justche

**


30 posted on 07/19/2005 5:03:23 PM PDT by justche (No one can go back and make a brand new start, any one can start now and make a brand new ending)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
You want to know if this guy is a good pick? Check out what is being said about him by the DUmmies.

Here we f***ing go This is no compromise at all. This nomination is as "in your face" as it is possible to get. Time to strap on the gloves folks.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1639265

31 posted on 07/19/2005 5:03:44 PM PDT by golfboy (character is doing what is right, when no one is looking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: All

[Jim Lindgren, Tuesday May 24, 2005 at 8:09pm] 2 Trackbacks / Possibly More Trackbacks
John Roberts and 100-0 Support.--
My co-blogger Orin is floating John Roberts as someone who might be able to get consensus support in the Senate (if not the 100-0 support that is being debated at the Debate Club). As my last post indicated, I have a more pessimistic view of whether opposition to a Bush Supreme Court nominee could be avoided, no matter whom Bush appointed.

Roberts was nominated for the DC Circuit in 2001 and was blocked for two years in the Senate Judiciary Committee, finally getting voted out of committee in May 2003. His committee vote was strong (16-3), but not unanimous. The Senate confirmation was without a roll call vote.

One has only to read the Alliance for Justice reports and press releases on Roberts to realize that, like almost any other Bush nominee, he would face a buzzsaw if nominated to the Supreme Court.

On its website, the National Council of Jewish Women lists the following organizations as opposing Roberts for the federal judiciary in 2003:

Alliance for Justice
Americans for Democratic Action
Feminist Majority
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
NARAL Pro-Choice America
National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association
National Council of Jewish Women
National Organization for Women
NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund

Indeed, Roberts was blocked when the first President Bush tried to appoint Roberts. As the Alliance for Justice puts it:


President George H.W. Bush nominated Mr. Roberts to the D.C. Circuit, but he was considered by some on the Senate Judiciary Committee to be too extreme in his views, and his nomination lapsed. He was nominated by President George W. Bush to the same seat in May 2001.


Here is the opening of the Alliance's Report, suggesting how someone whom some reasonable people might view as uncontroversial can depicted as unfit for even the DC Circuit, let alone the Supreme Court:


John G. Roberts, nominated by President Bush to a seat on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, has a record of hostility to the rights of women and minorities. He has also taken controversial positions in favor of weakening the separation of church and state and limiting the role of federal courts in protecting the environment. The Alliance for Justice opposes his nomination to the D.C. Circuit.

Although Mr. Roberts is indisputably a very capable lawyer, that alone does not qualify him for such a prestigious and critical post. As a group of over 300 law professors stated in a 2001 letter to the Senate,1a lifetime appointment to the federal bench is a privilege that comes with great responsibility and requires much more. Every nominee bears the burden of showing that he or she respects and pledges to protect the progress made in the areas of civil rights and liberties, the environment, and Congress’ constitutional role in protecting the health and safety of all Americans. Mr. Roberts’ record, particularly his record as a political appointee, argues strongly that he would not do so.

While working under Presidents Reagan and Bush, Mr. Roberts supported a hard-line, anti-civil rights policy that opposed affirmative action, would have made it nearly impossible for minorities to prove a violation of the Voting Rights Act and would have “resegregated” America’s public schools. He also took strongly anti-choice positions in two Supreme Court cases, one that severely restricted the ability of poor women to gain information about abortion services, and another that took away a key means for women and clinics to combat anti-abortion zealots. [In rereading this post after posting it, I think that a personal disclosure might be advisable. I consulted pro bono for NOW on the case (Scheidler) that I think is being referred to here.]

Finally, Mr. Roberts is being considered for lifetime tenure on a court that is only one step below the U.S. Supreme Court and is acknowledged to be the second most important court in the country. His nomination must be considered in light of the special significance of that court. Moreover, Judiciary Committee Chairman Hatch’s insistence on scheduling three controversial Circuit Court nominees, including Mr. Roberts, for confirmationhearings on a single day ensured that senators had no meaningful opportunity to question Mr. Roberts about his views on a number of critical issues. The Alliance for Justice urges the Senate to reject his confirmation.


This is what I was talking about in my last post. The 7 Democrats signing the deal on filibusters are in effect promising to stand up to what will be incredible pressure from organizations like those who opposed Roberts before, organizations such as the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the Alliance for Justice, the ADA, and NOW [for whom I have done work pro bono]. Can the senators live up to their promise?


32 posted on 07/19/2005 5:04:02 PM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shaka
We can never be sure,,,,,but

he is young,,,,

he has a Rehnquist background,,,

he has a Reagan background,,,,

SOUNDS GREAT TO ME SO FAR!!!!

33 posted on 07/19/2005 5:05:08 PM PDT by stockstrader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

Levin LOVES the choice.


34 posted on 07/19/2005 5:05:18 PM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Damn yer fast on the draw!


35 posted on 07/19/2005 5:05:57 PM PDT by Travis McGee (--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

The guy who was supposed to replace Dan Rather?


36 posted on 07/19/2005 5:06:42 PM PDT by RWCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Where can I listen to Levin?


37 posted on 07/19/2005 5:06:46 PM PDT by dfergu7477
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

With that crew lined up against him, he MUST be good value!


38 posted on 07/19/2005 5:07:03 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher (The Great Ronald Reagan & John Paul II - Heaven's Dream Team!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: dfergu7477
Levin just ended, but his show is streamed on wabcradio.com from 6-8pm Eastern.

Hugh Hewitt can be heard now at www.krla870.com

39 posted on 07/19/2005 5:09:31 PM PDT by doug from upland (The Hillary documentary is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: stockstrader

If true, this is a dynamite nomination. He appeared at my law school...and he is a rock-ribbed conservative. Of that....you can be certain.


40 posted on 07/19/2005 5:10:16 PM PDT by rog4vmi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: RWCon
The guy who was supposed to replace Dan Rather?

LOL... no, same name WAY different guy.

41 posted on 07/19/2005 5:11:10 PM PDT by golfboy (character is doing what is right, when no one is looking)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

This may have been the best draft choice on the board. He probably made enough money in private practice to be financially secure and yet has ample public service on his resume.

Good choice President Bush.


42 posted on 07/19/2005 5:12:00 PM PDT by joem15
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

LOL!

Sorry about that.

The "Down" that is good is more modern than that, is newer.

Gen Y.

I was using "down" in the older sense and showing my age in the process!

Lemme try to undo this.

He's very AGAINST Roe vs Wade.

He's Pro-Life.


43 posted on 07/19/2005 5:13:35 PM PDT by tiamat ("If some guy named Marduk calls, tell him I'm not home!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: america-rules

Ken Starr? THE LEFT IS GONNA HAVE A STROKE....


To quote Flounder from Animal House..."this is gonna be grrreeeeaaaattt "!!!!


44 posted on 07/19/2005 5:14:48 PM PDT by JediForce (DON'T FIRE UNTIL YOU SEE THE WHITES OF THE CURTAINS THEY ARE WEARING ON THEIR HEADS !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Thx


45 posted on 07/19/2005 5:14:51 PM PDT by dfergu7477
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Based on the comments so far, is it safe to say that the lynching of Karl Rove has moved to the back burner?


46 posted on 07/19/2005 5:15:03 PM PDT by Loyal Buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: america-rules
As Deputy Solicitor General, Roberts argued in a brief before the Supreme Court that "we continue to believe that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled. The Court’s conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion...finds no support in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution."**

Thank you, Mr. President.

Into the breach!

47 posted on 07/19/2005 5:19:21 PM PDT by grellis (Ravenclaw, class of '87)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

This certainly sounds promising . . . .


48 posted on 07/19/2005 5:20:40 PM PDT by Amore (First, let's kill all the lawyers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grellis

They want a war??? Lets give them a freaking war!!! We are behind you Mr. President, kick some ass, take some names!! Woo Hoo!! I like it.


49 posted on 07/19/2005 5:21:47 PM PDT by Shaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Biography!

Resumé!

Profile!

Wikipedia!

Background !

50 posted on 07/19/2005 5:22:41 PM PDT by freedrudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-78 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson