This is typical divide-and-conquer mischief from the Washington Post. It's clearly meant to anger conservatives, not to reassure liberals, who will oppose Roberts strongly.
Actual title:
Roberts Has Solid Conservative Credentials
Was Souter the man people thought he was? Didn't they think they were getting a conservative...did they get a conservative?
Bush had the chance to stop America's Holocaust, but instead allowed the slaughter continue.
I thought we wanted judges that made decisions based on the law rather than personal opinion. My bad.
What is necessary to overturning Roe is to find a case that Anthony Kennedy will go along with (or the retirement of Ginsburg or Stevens).
As a lower court nominee, Roberts had to say that. Any lower court's rulings are controlled by the Supreme Court.
Once he gets on the high court bench, all such bets are off.
Now calm down and read up on this guy before you start shrieking that we're all DOOOOMED!
To prevent duplication, do not alter the heading.
Well, he was not being confirmed for a position in which he did not HAVE to follow precedent then...he was just a lowly court judge and had to rely on precedent.
He wrote in a brief argument before the SCOTUS when he was a lawyer that Roe should be overturned.
He is a Federalist Society member. Regardless of what he says in his confirmation hearings, I believe it is quite clear he would have no problem overturning Roe.
Clearly, if both extremes oppose this guy, he must have been the right pick.
By the way, Roberts clearly disagrees with Roe on legal matters, and I think when the opportunity comes, when the time is right and the challenge right, he will vote to overturn Roe, or at the very least will help restrict it. But until then, it is his duty to follow the law and not ignore it or mutilate it like his liberal colleagues on the bench tend to do all the time.
"We are extremely disappointed that President Bush has chosen such a divisive nominee for the highest court in the nation, rather than a consensus nominee who would protect individual liberty and uphold Roe v. Wade." - NARAL Pro-Choice America.
A host of NARAL's graying harridans will have passed to their eternal reward when Justice Roberts is stripping the bogus penumbras and emanations from the Constitution.
You are accusing Bush of allowing a holocaust and playing games with the title of this thread.
Why is thread being allowed?
Ridiculous. RoeVWade isn't going to be overturned, overnight and PresBush can't change law as POTUS. Get real. Not only is it unfair to say that, you have no evidence to support such a statement. If approved, Roberts could turn out to be another pro-life SCJustice like Scalia, Thomas and Reinquest. I hope is that Roberts will side with the uncosntitutional nature of RoeVWade
Isn't it custom for the original poster to reply to their own thread?
Just wondering where you are bimboeruption.
If you want to sling mud by making up titles, you better be brave enough to defend yourself.
John Roberts appears to be an excellent choice for SCJ from everthing I've read here on FR tonight.
I guess some people are NEVER happy.
The President appears to have given us another Souter. That upper east coast Rockefeller upbringing will always show through.
You're a fool.
And you lost tonight.
Everyone that doubted this President or accused him of betrayal was wrong. Your opinions do not count now. Anymore than than Chuckie's do.
BTW, it would take a 5-4 court to reverse Roe, with Roberts we only have four.
He' Roman Catholic.
Don't underestimate what he will do as a member of the SCOTUS....
>>Supreme Court historian David Garrow of Emory University said that while Roberts is a conservative, he is not in the mold of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.<<
Interesting.
You're a fool.
Softly, softly, catchee monkee..
The ensuing battle will be "A living Constitution" v "settled law".
The Dems cite a "living constitution" every time they usurp it and make their own law. Then, once they have done that, they declare their travesty "settled law" so it won't be reversed.
We need to slide solid conservatives onto the court by whatever means possible, and slowly drive the activists out. THEN we can deal with their "settled law"!