Posted on 07/21/2005 1:26:42 PM PDT by JBW
Senator Schumer is planning to use his seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee to reopen a battle he has already lost. "I voted against Judge Roberts for the D.C. Court because he didn't answer questions fully and openly when he appeared before the committee," Mr. Schumer said on Tuesday, referring to President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court. But despite being rebuked by his colleagues for pressing inappropriate questions on Mr. Roberts when he was a federal appeals court nominee, Mr. Schumer has signaled he is going to revisit the same line of questioning. "It is vital that Judge Roberts answer a wide range of questions openly, honestly, and fully in the coming months," the senator said. Mr. Roberts has been willing to answer questions about his judicial philosophy. "My own judicial philosophy begins with an appreciation of the limited role of a judge in our system of divided powers," he wrote in response to written questions from Mr. Schumer in 2003. "Judges are not to legislate and are not to execute the laws." But Mr. Roberts declined, in response to prodding from Mr. Schumer, to give his personal views in respect of particular decisions. "With respect, Senator, you're getting back in the area of asking me to criticize particular Supreme Court precedents," Mr. Roberts testified in 2003. "I think it's inappropriate because it would be harmful to the independence and integrity of the Federal judiciary. The reason I think key to the independence and strength of the Federal judiciary is that judges come to the cases before them, unencumbered by prior commitments, beyond the commitment to apply the rule of law and the oath that they take."
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
A momentary flash of the elusive "spine."
You wrote, "If Roberts meets this level of dishonesty . . ."
Are you suggesting that Roberts is dishonest? There is absolutely nothing to justify any suggestion that Roberts is dishonest!
Good point. It's also the case (so I've read) that Fortas did not have sufficient votes for confirmation (probably due to fencesitters), so the filibuster wasn't thwarting the will of the majority.
No, he's saying that if it were shown that Roberts were as dishonest as Abe Fortas, a filibuster might be in order. It was a hypothetical. Nothing to suggest that Roberts is dishonest.
Go Chuckie! Ask your stupid questions and show the voters how petty and vindictive the Democratic party is.
You da man!
Judges need to judge each case based on the merits of each case, otherwise, why have judges? Can Chuckie be held in contempt for forcing judges to ask contemptible questions?
Hypothetically, if Bubba had 6 (or even all 9), openings in the Supremes, would the radical left insist that the court MUST HAVE 4 conservatives, 4 leftists, and one spineless swing-judge? Yeah right!
GWB will have something Bubba never had and never will have, and that's a legacy.
I thought it was more like
YEEEEAAARRRGGGHHH!!
Judges need to judge each case based on the merits of each case, otherwise, why have judges? Can Chuckie be held in contempt for forcing judges to answer contemptable questions?
Hypothetically, if Bubba had 6 (or even all 9), openings in the Supremes, would the radical left insist that the court MUST HAVE 4 conservatives, 4 leftists, and one spineless swing-judge? Yeah right!
GWB will have something Bubba never had and never will have, and that's a legacy.
Roberts refused to answer questions on how he would rule in particular cases when he was up for the DC court and he will do so again. Chuckie can whine and cry all he wants, he's not going to get the answers to his questions.
His petty character will be noticed however by the public and associated with the Democratic party. He's likely to be joined by Fat Teddy and a few other Dim Senators which is all the better.
It's not just appearance. Those of us in the arms rights community have know his character for decades.
Which is cause and which is effect, between brain damage and liberalism?
Personally, I think liberalism is caused by being cooped up in big, high density, cities. The same thing happens to rats, the rodent variety, if you crowd them together too much.
You're right. It's not natural.
It's called dumbness. It affects many of Jewish background and heritage. Thank God it does not hinder most in Israel and their fantastic IDF! It's American Jews that are the idiots, and Schumer is in the top ten!!!
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.