Blips in the confirmation picture (Roberts)

The Washington Times ^ | 9-20-05 | Bruce Fein

[JZelle]

Judge John Roberts soon will be confirmed as the 17th chief justice of the United States to replace William H. Rehnquist. Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats Joseph Biden of Delaware, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Charles Schumer of New York and Dianne Feinstein of California are frowning and gnashing. Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans Orrin Hatch of Utah, Jon Kyl of Arizona, Jeff Sessions of Alabama and John Cornyn of Texas are smiling and exulting. But something is wrong with this picture.

[JZelle]

I hope he's wrong.

[eyespysomething]

But something is wrong with this picture. The Supreme Court will hop marginally to the political left with Judge Roberts as chief justice. Compared with the late Chief Justice Rehnquist, he is more accommodating to First Amendment rights of free speech and association, Fourth Amendment privacy interests, and the power of Congress to encroach on traditional state prerogatives under the Commerce Clause. Judge Roberts also is less inclined to disturb liberal Supreme Court precedents.

In sum, President Bush's shifting of Judge Roberts from the liberal seat of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor to Rehnquist's conservative chair marked a nontrivial ideological victory for Democrats and a doctrinal setback for Republicans.

[mathluv]

wrong about what?

[msnimje]

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!

These people are so completely unaware of what is going on.

Because John Roberts successfully NEUTERED the Democrats, they think he is one of them!!!!

[frogjerk]

WE'RE DOOOOOMED!!!!

But something is wrong with this picture. The Supreme Court will hop marginally to the political left with Judge Roberts as chief justice. Compared with the late Chief Justice Rehnquist, he is more accommodating to First Amendment rights of free speech and association, Fourth Amendment privacy interests, and the power of Congress to encroach on traditional state prerogatives under the Commerce Clause. Judge Roberts also is less inclined to disturb liberal Supreme Court precedents.

The guy isn't even on the job yet and already the crying has begun. This is all pure speculation at this point.

[EagleUSA]

Maybe yes, maybe no. Hard to say, until we see Roberts in action.

[nikos1121]

Until he actually hears and responds to cases no one can predict anything.

[G.Mason]

"In sum, President Bush's shifting of Judge Roberts from the liberal seat of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor to Rehnquist's conservative chair marked a nontrivial ideological victory for Democrats and a doctrinal setback for Republicans."

There is no such thing as a "shifting" of one seat (either liberal or conservative) in the sense this is written.

There are nine seats on the Supreme Court. The replacement fills no seat but their own. The fact that it was vacated by a moron would not, in fact, mean that is to be filled by a moron, unless of course one is a moron.

I would advise all the 11 lb. brains to begin concentrating on the next nomination.

Let the wailing begin.

[sitetest]

We'll see.

It will depend on 1. Where Chief Justice Roberts comes down on particular issues; and 2. Who is the ultimate replacement for Justice O'Connor.

If Chief Justice Roberts is truly a conservative, and the replacement for Justice O'Connor is just as conservative, then it will have been a good trade-off. If either Chief Justice Roberts turns out to be more in the mold of Earl Warren, or even another Sandra Day O'Connor, OR we wind up with a "moderate" for Justice O'Connor, then we've been screwed.

Time will tell.

[newgeezer]

Democrats ...Biden..., ...Kennedy..., ...Schumer... and ...Feinstein... are frowning and gnashing.

Hopefully, we ain't seen nothin' yet.

Mr. President, conservatives await your next appointment.

[Cicero]

This is NOT the time for Roberts to make loud conservative noises. Let's wait until he is confirmed.

[hflynn]

This is a very bad attempt by the left to say the Roberts confirmation will be a win for the them. I think the vote count in the Judicary committee on Thursday will tell everyone who won and won't be the Kennedys, Schumers, Bidens, etc of the world.

[b4its2late]

I like the conservative t-shirt add on the WT page....

[wmfights]

Wait until Priscilla Owen is the next nominee!

The rats will really start gnashing their teeth. The question then will be will the PUBS hold together and get her appointed, or fall apart under the pressure.

[dougiefresh]

I heard Chris Dodd on Imus this morning saying something to the effect "I would like to support Judge Roberts. However, his age concerns me because I think of my 2 daughters and it worry about how he will have the power to limit their rights for the next 30 to 40 years if he doesn't believe the constitution is a living document."

Nice to see another Democrat discriminating against someone without being challenged. So, even if you are extremely qualified to fill the position, you shouldn't be supported because you are too young?

[G Larry]

The libs will really be po'd when they find themselves hunting for Ginsberg's replacement next.

[eyespysomething]

What I don't get is why seats on the SC are liberal or conservative. Shouldn't they be neutral in a sense? You know, constitutionally driven?

Wait, what am I saying... Nothing is that easy.

[Huck]

That's the impression of Roberts I got, but then I hear Clarence Thomas gave similar answers.

[hophead]

The news report I just heard is that there is some surprise that Harry Reid will, are you ready for this, VOTE AGAINST JUDGE ROBERTS!!!! Oh God no. What a surprise!!!