Replies

We don't know what her judicial philosophy is.

You don't know what Roberts' judicial philosophy is either. In fact, Roberts testified that he doesn't have one. Let's face it... If you knew what the nominee's judicial philosophy was, then they would not get confirmed. We're dependent on Bush making that call. If you did not trust him to do so, then you should have voted for someone else.

I felt that was exactly why Roberts' shouldn't have been nominated. At least one can argue in his defense he has superb qualifications to be a Chief Justice. Harriet Miers brings none to the job of Associate Justice unless you count her personal friendship with the President.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

You don't know what Roberts' judicial philosophy is either

John G. Roberts, Jr said the following during his confirmation hearings about is judicial philosophy:
"If the Constitution says that the little guy should win, then the little guy's going to win in the court before me," Roberts told senators. "But if the Constitution says that the big guy should win, well then the big guy's going to win because my obligation is to the Constitution."

This implies that the Constitution is indeed a living document because this statement suggests that a judge can interpret laws that will satisfy certain expectations of one particular type of philosophy.

That is to acknowledge that laws can be bent one way or another.

“Do you believe today that the right to privacy does exist in the Constitution?” asked Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chair of the Judiciary Committee, during the Sept. 13 session.

“Senator, I do,” Roberts said. “The right to privacy is protected under the Constitution in various ways.”

In discussing his understanding of privacy rights, Roberts pointed to the Constitution’s First, Third and Fourth Amendments, which are part of the Bill of Rights. Among other things, they protect citizens against improper searches and seizures by the government, protect against restrictions of freedom of speech and assembly, and prohibit the establishment of an official state religion.

Roberts added that in the past 80 years, the Supreme Court has recognized the concept of “personal privacy,” as protected under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The high court used this concept of privacy as the basis for its 1972 decision in Roe vs. Wade that legalized abortion, as well as its Lawrence decision overturning sodomy laws, considered to be the court’s most sweeping ruling on gay rights.