Schumer's Questions for Roberts

FOX ^ | 7/20/05

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

1. First Amendment and Freedom of Expression:

What, if any, are the limitations on the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution?

- When can Government regulate public speech by individuals?

- When does speech cross the line between Constitutionally-protected free expression and slander?

- In what ways does the First Amendment protect the spending and raising of money by individuals in politics?

- Can Government regulate hate speech? What about sexually explicit materials?

Specifically:

- Do you agree with the landmark decision in NYT v. Sullivan (1964), which held that public criticism of public figures is acceptable unless motivated by actual malice? Who do you believe constitutes a public figure under this standard?

- Do you believe the Supreme Court was correct to strike down the Communications Decency Act in Reno v. ACLU (1997) on the grounds that pornography on the Internet is protected by the First Amendment?

- What is your view on the distinction the Supreme Court drew in Republican Party v. White and McConnell v. FEC... between contributions and expenditures in the course of political campaigns? Do you believe that it is legitimate to construe campaign expenditures as protected speech but not donations by individuals?

2. First Amendment and the Establishment Clause:

- Under the Establishment Clause, what... is the appropriate role of religion in Government?

- Must the Government avoid involvement with religion as a whole, or is the prohibition just on Government involvement with a specific religion?

- Is there a difference between religious expression in Government buildings/documents/and institutions and Government spending on private, faith-based initiatives?

- What do you see as the Constitutionally protected or limited role of faith-based groups in Government-funded activity? In Government institutions?

Specifically:

- In the two cases the Supreme Court decided on the Ten Commandments recently.....

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Am I the only person suffering from Chuckie fatigue?

[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

Who wrote these? You know Chucky is not clever enough to come up with this on his own.

[darkwing104]

Someone should ask Schumer if he ever has done anything useful.

[rhombus]

Who wrote these?

Round up the usual suspects: ACLU, NARAL...

[dts32041]

Dear chuckie,

Unintended Consequences, will result.

[frogjerk]

I was thinking the same thing.

16. When the Supreme Court issues non-unanimous opinions, Justice Scalia and Justice Ginsburg frequently find themselves in disagreement with each other. Do you more frequently agree with Justice Scalia's opinions, or Justice Ginsburg's?

Let me guess what the correct answer is....hmmm....

[Abram]

My two questions for Senator Chuck Schumer?"

1. Can you walk and chew gum at the same time?
2. Can you walk and not drag your knuckles on the ground?

[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

Exactly, Chucky didn't write it.

[Peach]

Do you agree with the reasoning in Bush v. Gore? Why or why not?
What power does the Supreme Court have to intervene in state election laws (as in Bush v. Gore)?
- What role should the Supreme Court be playing in disputed elections?

They've never gotten over it.

[Zacs Mom]

"Just say no!"
( to anything and everything Bush wants or needs)!

[frogjerk]

Chucky: "- When does speech cross the line between Constitutionally-protected free expression and slander?"

Roberts: "When you open your mouth..."

[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

"16. When the Supreme Court issues non-unanimous opinions, Justice Scalia and Justice Ginsburg frequently find themselves in disagreement with each other. Do you more frequently agree with Justice Scalia's opinions, or Justice Ginsburg's?

"Let me guess what the correct answer is....hmmm...."

Chucky wants to hear Ginsburg, I am sure that the true answer is Scalia. I think that Roberts will find a way around this.

[Dead Corpse]

My question for Judge Roberts:

Many States are putting gun bans in place. The US Code of Law has entire sections devoted to prohibitory firearms regulations. The Second Amendment states quite clearly "shall not be infringed" and the Constitution is the "Supreme law of the Land". How would you rule on such cases where simple possession of a proscribed firearm was the only "crime" committed? Or that is was born in such a way that some government hack did not like?

For some, the issue is Roe V Wade. Judge Roberts stance on that appears to be on the correct side in that he feels it was decided incorrectly and that abortion is a States issue.

For me, clue me in on his 2A stance. The Second Amendment protects all the rest.

[ml/nj]

Dear Chuck the Schmuck,

- When can Government regulate public speech by individuals?

When the government is a State Government. Next question.

- When does speech cross the line between Constitutionally-protected free expression and slander?

Is slander a Federal crime? Did I miss something?

- In what ways does the First Amendment protect the spending and raising of money by individuals in politics?

It should keep people like you in Washington from passing laws that restrict such activity in any way shape or form. Clear enough for you a$$#01e?

- Can Government regulate hate speech? What about sexually explicit materials?

I guess you didn't understand the answer I gave to the first question you asked.

ML/NJ

[Jersey Republican Biker Chick]

"My two questions for Senator Chuck Schumer?"

1. Can you walk and chew gum at the same time?

2. Can you walk and not drag your knuckles on the ground?

I think the answer would have to be NO to both!!

[Phantom Lord]

Whenever Schumer askes Robert a question he should reply, "I take the Ginsberg and decline to answer."

[maggief]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85640,00.html

EXCERPT

In the beginning of Wednesday's Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for Bush nominee John G. Roberts Jr. (search), Chairman Orrin Hatch (search) praised Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer (search) of New York for asking "intelligent" questions, but then Hatch switched gears.

"Some [of his questions] I totally disagree with," Hatch of Utah said. "Some I think are dumbass questions, between you and me. I am not kidding you. I mean, as much as I love and respect you, I just think that's true."

A stunned Schumer asked if he heard the chairman correctly, to which Hatch said yes. Again, Schumer asked Hatch if he would like to "revise and extend his remark," congressional speak for change his mind.

A former trial attorney, Hatch replied: "No, I am going to keep it exactly the way it is. I mean, I hate to say it. I mean, I feel badly saying it between you and me. But I do know dumbass questions when I see dumbass questions."

[Clintons Are White Trash]

Wasn't it the retiring Mrs. O'Connor that repeatedly replied at her hearings "it would not be appropriate for me to answer any question regarding an issue that may come before the court"???

[dirtboy]

- Do you believe that Roe v. Wade (1973) was correctly decided? What is your view of the quality of the legal reasoning in that case? Do you believe that it reached the right result?

Ginsburg refused to answer this question, Chuckie. So the precedent was set by a liberal nominee - will you respect that precedent or attack any refusal by Roberts to answer this question, thereby revealing yourself to be a rank partisan hypocrite?