Roberts says he’ll respect settled law

MSNBC.com ^ | 7-2-05

[Jefferson2000]

WASHINGTON - John Roberts pledged to keep an open mind and respect settled law if confirmed to the Supreme Court, telling Senate committee members in a questionnaire that precedent is important in “promoting the stability of the legal system.”

The response, numbering about 100 pages and released by the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, provides Roberts’ responses to a broad array of questions, including his work history, political ties and views on judicial activism.

“A sound judicial philosophy should reflect recognition of the fact that the judge operates within a system of rules developed over the years by other judges equally striving to live up to the judicial oath,” Roberts said in response to a question about judicial activism.

[samadams2000]

Bark like a dog.....

[Dog Gone]

Didn't click through yet, but the headline is a gross overstatement of the quote Roberts provided in the text you posted.

[My2Cents]

Now the question is, how "settled" is Roe v. Wade?

[U.H. Conservative]

Roe deserves the same respect as settled law that Plessy deserved. None.

[King Prout]

I can but hope Mr. Roberts is "telling the truth like a Jedi" here

[Jefferson2000]

>>Now the question is, how "settled" is Roe v. Wade?<<

Well it IS precedent. A judge who respects stability and precedent is less likely to do something some here would prefer. Robert Bork said that he would have no trouble overturning precedent if he thought it was wrong.

[Dog Gone]

If you post AP articles from the numerous sources that require excerpting, then you can post the whole thing. You could have found this story almost anywhere else, but I have seen your pattern.

You want to stir up conservative opposition to Roberts. So you post excerpted stories with headlines that might make the conservative base made.

You are a very interesting troll.

[airborne]

Precedent? So, we can count on him voting to overturn the recent eminent domain decision, which went against prior USSC precedent?

[nosofar]

While I can see judicial stability is important, it seems just a bit ridiculous to weight the importance of one justice over another merely because the first had the opportunity to vote on a decision before the second. "I was here first so neener, neener."

[ElkGroveDan]

Well there are only 10 truly "settled" laws in my book. Hopefully that's his take on it too. I'm giving him his due until I have a reason to think otherwise.

[af_vet_1981]

If you post AP articles from the numerous sources that require excerpting, then you can post the whole thing. You could have found this story almost anywhere else, but I have seen your pattern. You want to stir up conservative opposition to Roberts. So you post excerpted stories with headlines that might make the conservative base made.

You are a very interesting troll. BTTT

[Jefferson2000]

>>Roe deserves the same respect as settled law that Plessy deserved. None<<

Well a libnut on DU would probably say (assuming they knew a thing about constitutional law which I doubt) that plessy was a non-activist decision that allowed the states to decide whether to compell racial segregation via the democratic process. But regardless, history will tell us if Roe ends up as infamous as Plessy.

[Trust but Verify]

Good catch. You are right. I went back and looked and virtually everything he posted has an element of liberal spin to it.

[ElkGroveDan]

You are a very interesting troll.

Let's keep an eye on him.

[U.H. Conservative]

My prediction is that Roe will stand second in infamy only to Dred Scott.

[Jaysun]

"They do not have a commission to solve society’s problems, as they see them, but simply to decide cases before them according to the rule of law," Roberts stated.

Roberts is on the right track. What the Senators and the country are entitled to know is how a judicial nominee regards his duty to respect the law as it is written — especially the Constitution — rather than vote according to his own "views," whether on abortion, religious symbols, or whatever. Cases such as Roe v Wade are absurd and if the judges uphold their oath it'll be overturned.

[Soul Seeker]

That isn't his full quote.

Brit had the full quote on tonight. I don't have it handy but essentially he stated he respected the role of precedent, and so would carefully take it under advisement when approaching the possibility of overturning precedent.

[My2Cents]

"Separate but equal" was settled law until Brown vs. Board of Education. How do the libs justify "Brown"?