Posted on 09/13/2005 5:01:31 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
Q&A with Roberts to Start
On Tuesday, the eighteen members of the Senate Judiciary Cmte. begin questioning Chief Justice nominee John Roberts. This will take all day, with the senators asking their questions, up to a half-hour for each member, in order of seniority, alternating by party.
The Schedule (media advisory)
Tentative Schedule for the Hearing: Schedule is subject to change
Tuesday, Sept. 13
9:30 am Chairman Specter begins 30 minute round of questioning (Round 1)
1:00 pm Break for lunch
2:00 pm Resume questioning
6:00 pm Break for dinner
7:00 pm Resume questioning
8:30 pm Round 1 questioning ends
The Dem playbook
The Hill newspaper gives us a peek at the Democratic playbook for the Roberts hearings. Below are the attack assignments for the Democratic members of the Committee:
Kennedy -- civil rights
Leahy -- Bybee torture memo
Biden -- privacy, personal autonomyand the 9th Amendment
Kohl -- Property rights and civil liberties
Feinstein -- "judicial activism" and Roe vs. Wade
Feingold -- limits of executive powers
Schumer and Durbin have wisely refused to show their hand.
Via FromTheBleachers
LIVE LINKS
Senate Judiciary Committee webcast.
I wonder if it's POSSIBLE to embarrass Kennedy? I think not, he's such a pig.
I do, too! I'm listening to him word for word.
You could say he is the "clean up hitter."
Feinstein has indicted herself as a certified bigot. She seems to be obsessed about religion, and does not disguise her distrust of anyone who is a practicing Catholic. I am personally insulted by her questions.
Yeehaaww!
Go Judge Roberts! Thanks for the updates folks, wish I could hang around more.
1. Judge, are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Federalist Society?
2. Judge, have you, or your wife, or other members of your family, ever shopped at Wal-Mart?
3. Judge, did you ever read "Playboy" in college?
But that is exactly what it has been used for for several generations by liberal activist justices. I want to see a few of those misguided "remedies" reversed, and strict adherence to stare decisis doctrine would not allow that to happen. I'm not at all sure that Roberts would vote to reverse some of those bad decisions, but I am quite sure that Thomas would and reasonably sure that Scalia would also.
I believe I could be satisfied with Roberts' decisions if he was working with a clean sheet of paper, but all justices have to take into consideration bad decisions of the past which are now considered to be settled law. I realize that simply ignoring precedence would create serious problems, and that precedence should have a great deal of influence when justices are forming their own later opinions. But if bad decisions are so deeply graven into stone that they can never be reconsidered, then separate but equal public facilities would still be settled law and public schools, parks, buses, etc would still be racially segregated. I would just like to know how firmly he is committed to stare decisis before I feel comfortable about him.
Somebody should check his breath. Bet he spent his lunch at the pub.
It's Bush's fault.
Teddy is the TOAD!!!!!! I knew it... I knew it... I knew it...
Hugh Hewitt said Roberts was good....really good...Hugh is a great judge of character.
Work hard and learn all you can and you will do just fine, especially if you enjoy what you are doing.
"Try not to inject the pesky facts into the thread; it confuses the malcontents."
Sorry, I'll try to behave ;)
Do you want the guy to get himself Borked????
It's not his job to "defend the pro-life cause."
I just love seeing somebody getting the 'everloving crop' beaten out of them.
Especially these TOADS. :-)
I love Jeff Sessions.
This is MUST SEE TV.
Can't you stay?
Have a recorder?
Perfect description.
Yeap, Sessions just thwaped Kennedy. Beautiful thing.
lol
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.