Confirming Justice
The Senate will have to scurry to hold hearings and a vote on John G. Roberts' nomination to the United States Supreme Court in time for the October opening of the Court's next session. From the looks and sounds of things, he will get the confirmation unless some dreadful secret about the man suddenly emerges during the hearings. Still, I hope that real hearings are actually held, ones that seriously consider this man's credentials for sitting on the highest court.
Any such nominee is carefully prepped for the confirmation hearings, and I'm sure that Judge Rogers has been advised not to answer questions that deal with issues which will be heard in the next session. Committee members know this, yet I hope they will still probe the nominee on the general issues which face the Supreme Court every session.
The Washington Post reports that Democrats on the Committee are leaning towards exploring the nominee's views on the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
Democratic senators signaled yesterday that they may quiz President Bush's Supreme Court nominee more closely about his views on interstate commerce than on abortion. But some Republicans, sensing that John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination is off to a powerful start, counseled him to say as little as possible on all fronts.
Key Democrats,meanwhile, hinted that the hearings may focus less on abortion -- an emotional issue that many Americans associate with Supreme Court struggles -- than on the Constitution's commerce clause, which regulates interstate commerce. The Judiciary Committee's most senior Democrat, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.) , told reporters that he cares about how a Supreme Court justice can affect "real people's lives."
"The most obvious area is in the area of the commerce clause," Kennedy said.
"Neither the Supreme Court nor any circuit court has adopted Judge Roberts' crabbed view of congressional power under the Commerce Clause," the liberal Alliance for Justice said in a report. "The effect of Judge Roberts' views on Congress' Commerce Clause authority might threaten to undermine a wide swath of federal protections, including many environmental, civil rights, workplace and criminal laws."
The approach does make sense in some respects. Judge Roberts has only sat on the bench for two years, and has written few opinions which will give some insight into his judicial philosophy. The one dissenting opinion that has liberals concerned is one in which he felt that the Endangered Species Act, based on the Commerce Clause, should not be applied to cases where the species involved never leaves the State of California in any way, shape, or form. In other words, Judge Roberts appears to be a federalist who would limit the scope of the federal government in purely states' affairs. We should hear more about his thinking along those lines.
But, as a recent poll reported (again) by the Washington Post, Americans also want to hear this nominee's position on that hot-button issue, abortion.
A clear majority of Americans say John G. Roberts Jr. should be confirmed to serve on the Supreme Court but want him to state his views on abortion before the Senate votes on his nomination, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. ...
Nearly two in three -- 64 percent -- said he should publicly explain his views on abortion before the Senate acts.
The most obvious question should refer to his answer in previous confirmation hearings wherein he stated that he believed Roe v Wade is the law of the land. Will he continue to hold that view when he is on the very court that established that important precedent?
Additionally, Roe was decided not on the Commerce Clause, but on one of the 'penumbral' rights not specifically enumerated in the US Consitution: the right to privacy. I think the Senators have every right, not to mention the duty, to question Judge Rogers on his views of this right and how it pertains to a woman's right to control her own body. Hopefully there will be at least one Senator who will ask the question. Hopefully the nominee will answer directly.
We shall see.
Any such nominee is carefully prepped for the confirmation hearings, and I'm sure that Judge Rogers has been advised not to answer questions that deal with issues which will be heard in the next session. Committee members know this, yet I hope they will still probe the nominee on the general issues which face the Supreme Court every session.
The Washington Post reports that Democrats on the Committee are leaning towards exploring the nominee's views on the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
Democratic senators signaled yesterday that they may quiz President Bush's Supreme Court nominee more closely about his views on interstate commerce than on abortion. But some Republicans, sensing that John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination is off to a powerful start, counseled him to say as little as possible on all fronts.
Key Democrats,meanwhile, hinted that the hearings may focus less on abortion -- an emotional issue that many Americans associate with Supreme Court struggles -- than on the Constitution's commerce clause, which regulates interstate commerce. The Judiciary Committee's most senior Democrat, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.) , told reporters that he cares about how a Supreme Court justice can affect "real people's lives."
"The most obvious area is in the area of the commerce clause," Kennedy said.
"Neither the Supreme Court nor any circuit court has adopted Judge Roberts' crabbed view of congressional power under the Commerce Clause," the liberal Alliance for Justice said in a report. "The effect of Judge Roberts' views on Congress' Commerce Clause authority might threaten to undermine a wide swath of federal protections, including many environmental, civil rights, workplace and criminal laws."
The approach does make sense in some respects. Judge Roberts has only sat on the bench for two years, and has written few opinions which will give some insight into his judicial philosophy. The one dissenting opinion that has liberals concerned is one in which he felt that the Endangered Species Act, based on the Commerce Clause, should not be applied to cases where the species involved never leaves the State of California in any way, shape, or form. In other words, Judge Roberts appears to be a federalist who would limit the scope of the federal government in purely states' affairs. We should hear more about his thinking along those lines.
But, as a recent poll reported (again) by the Washington Post, Americans also want to hear this nominee's position on that hot-button issue, abortion.
A clear majority of Americans say John G. Roberts Jr. should be confirmed to serve on the Supreme Court but want him to state his views on abortion before the Senate votes on his nomination, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. ...
Nearly two in three -- 64 percent -- said he should publicly explain his views on abortion before the Senate acts.
The most obvious question should refer to his answer in previous confirmation hearings wherein he stated that he believed Roe v Wade is the law of the land. Will he continue to hold that view when he is on the very court that established that important precedent?
Additionally, Roe was decided not on the Commerce Clause, but on one of the 'penumbral' rights not specifically enumerated in the US Consitution: the right to privacy. I think the Senators have every right, not to mention the duty, to question Judge Rogers on his views of this right and how it pertains to a woman's right to control her own body. Hopefully there will be at least one Senator who will ask the question. Hopefully the nominee will answer directly.
We shall see.
posted by Diane at 9:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home