Posted on 07/01/2005 8:40:50 AM PDT by JBW
Justice O'Connor is retiring. Speculation on her replacement began long ago.
I'd love to see the President go out on a limb and nominate someone to the Supreme Court who isn't even a lawyer. There's nothing wrong with this country that a few accountants and engineers on the Supreme Court couldn't fix.
My choice is JANICE ROGERS BROWN.
My choice is JANICE ROGERS BROWN.
Janice Rogers Brown. The more I read about her the more I like her. She's a female Clarence Thomas in many ways...and I've often said that a court full of Thomases would be my dream! Actually, my dream court would have Scalia as the liberal on the court...LOL...
Imagine a SCOTUS justice with a pocket protector...
Condi's not a lawyer, right?
"I'd love to see the President go out on a limb and nominate someone to the Supreme Court who isn't even a lawyer. There's nothing wrong with this country that a few accountants and engineers on the Supreme Court couldn't fix."
When you're right, you're right.
I nominate Ben Stein!
"Emceeing the National Right to Life's Proudly Pro-Life Awards Dinner a few months after Sept. 11, Stein spoke somberly of the 3,000 people who lost their lives that day, then added that many more lives than that are taken each day by abortion. "Abortion," said Stein, "is the worst form of terrorism because it is against the most innocent of lives, the unborn.""
regards..
Balance!
I want , Mark Levin author of the best seller " men in Black " a constitutional specialist who better understands what the framers were trying to accomplish in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights etc .
John G. Roberts would be the best choice!
Based on her writings she is tremendous, but she's barely taken up her post on the appeals court.
Estrada!
FYI..check out the link in #9..good thread to bookmark
Mark Levin would put a kink in the Libs colon for sure. LOL!
John G. Roberts looks like an attractive candidate and is a youngish sort who might have a productive tenure. Anyone know where he comes down on the important legal questions of the day? I see that NARAL doesn't like him, which leads me to think he'd be a good choice.
Potential Nominee Profile--Judge John G. Roberts
This post is part of a series of profiles of potential Supreme Court nominees. Each entry includes a brief biography, relevant links, and (if applicable) short descriptions of some notable opinions.
Brief biography:
Judge Roberts was appointed to the D.C. Circuit in 2003 by President George W. Bush (he was also nominated by the first President Bush, but never received a Senate vote). Before his appointment, he practiced at Hogan & Hartson from 1986-1989 and 1993-2003. During the interlude, he was the Principal Deputy Solicitor General in the first Bush administration. He also served in the Reagan administration as a Special Assistant to the Attorney General from 1981-1982 and as Associate Counsel to the President from 1982-1986.
Judge Roberts attended Harvard College and Harvard Law School. He then clerked for Judge Henry Friendly on the Second Circuit and for Justice Rehnquist.
Judge Roberts is fifty years old. He and his wife have two children.
Relevant links:
Judge Roberts's Federal Judicial Center profile is available here. His Department of Justice nomination bio is here. Tony Mauro's profile for Law.com is here.
The possibility of a Roberts nomination has been thoroughly covered by legal blogs. SCOTUSBlog's four-part series can be found here: Part I; Part II; Part III; Part IV. The Volokh Conspiracy's recent discussion wrapped up here (see the end of the post for links to the rest of the discussion).
The debate on Judge Roberts's nomination to the D.C. Circuit (he was nominated in 2001 and confirmed in 2003) provides a preview of likely public reaction to a Supreme Court nomination. Liberal groups criticized many of the positions he argued while working in the Reagan and Bush I administrations. This report from the Alliance for Justice is representative. As this report from NARAL illustrates, pro-choice groups focused on the anti-Roe stances taken in briefs written by Roberts during his time in the Solicitor General's office. The Department of Justice's summary of the support for Judge Roberts's nomination is available here.
Selected notable opinions:
Hedgepeth ex rel. Hedgepath v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, 386 F.3d 1148 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (available here). Writing for a unanimous court, Judge Roberts rejected Fourth Amendment and Equal Protection Clause challenges to the arrest and detention of a twelve-year old girl for eating french fries on a Metro train. The case received some media attention because of its extreme facts--as Judge Roberts noted in the first line of his opinion, "[n]o one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation."
Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1158 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (available here). In his dissent from a denial of rehearing en banc, Judge Roberts criticized the panel's holding that a regulation governing the treatment of a non-commercial species of wildlife was within Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. He argued that Lopez and Morrison required the court to adopt a narrower rule for Commerce Clause challenges, but also suggested that there might be other bases on which to sustain the regulation.
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.