Bush nominates Roberts for Supreme Court

[Dirty Name]

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS...ain/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Tuesday selected U.S. Circuit Judge John Roberts Jr. as his nominee to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. Bush called the selection of a nominee to the high court "one of the most consequential decisions a president makes." The move sets the stage for a possible battle with advocacy groups who have criticized Roberts in the past. The announcement ended nearly three weeks of fervent speculation about who will take O'Connor's pivotal seat on the nation's highest court. Roberts, 50, who serves on U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, considered the most influential federal panel outside of the Supreme Court, took the bench in 2003 after his confirmation was held up two years by Senate Democrats. A veteran appellate attorney, he has argued 39 cases before the Supreme Court, both in private practice and as deputy solicitor general during the administration of Bush's father, President George H.W. Bush.

Methinks the liberals in this country are going to give birth to a cow if they don't abort it in a hurry.

[Mr.Vicchio]

I think Bush would only get a green light if he nominated Bill Clinton... but that's just my view of the situation.

[bishop]

roberts is anti-choice, isn't he?

[Dirty Name]

No, he's anti-abortion.

[bishop]

*sigh*

same thing dirty.. thanks for the semantical game though. :)

[Mr.Vicchio]

http://www.independentjudiciary.com/...Roberts_Report .pdf

He has a record of hostility to the rights of women and minorities!

Man I wonder how many of these they had ready to go?

[Zeebadee]

This is rapidly coming down to a one issue confirmation hearing, Roe V Wade. I'd like to hear what this guy has to say about eminent domain, the abdication of congress in their responsibility to declare war, and issues of the 10th amendment, the limitation of federal governmental power.

[Whodoe!]

Quote by: Mr.Vicchio I think Bush would only get a green light if he nominated Bill Clinton... but that's just my view of the situation.

Ha! That would cool if Bush nominated Bill Clinton. Since he is playing golf with Big Shrub now, people would smell a rat! Manchurian Clinton anyone?

Quote by: Zeebadee This is rapidly coming down to a one issue confirmation hearing, Roe V Wade. I'd like to hear what this guy has to say about eminent domain, the abdication of congress in their responsibility to declare war, and issues of the 10th amendment, the limitation of federal governmental power.

Fat chance he'll ever answer a direct question, instead proclaiming his intention to strive to strive towards striving. Kind of like being on hold for tech support.

[MerlinsByte]

He is a conservative, I would have been happier with someone a bit more to the right.

But still, watching Kennedy's face turn purple will be worth it I reckon. That is the gauge I use the more purple his face becomes indicates how good the nominee is dark burple is a very good choice. This may be a plus for the pro life movement.

mb

[belverron]

He doesn't seem all that bad, really. For a Republican. I have mixed feelings about Roe, so it's probably just a good thing that he's not afraid to have an opinion on the issue. Saying both that it should be overturned and that it's the 'settled law of the land' makes me wonder if he's not pandering to both sides anyway, though. I'd like to know the contexts of those remarks.

I'm also concerned that he's had only two years of experience as a judge.

*edit* And I'm not sure how I feel about high school graduations containing religious ceremonies, depending on what his exact stance is (or perhaps its not--he was arguing on behalf of the Bush administration).

[tman_ndsu08]

Didn't Bush say that he wasn't nominating anyone to make new law?

So I don't see what the big deal is.

[belverron]

He said he wasn't nominating someone who would "legislate from the bench". Which means someone who's too liberal. Which mean he'll appoint a conservative. Wow. Shocker.

[Tesserakt]

In my personal opinion they had to do this because of Rehnquist...

I don't think he (Rehnquist) would willingly retire if he saw Bush put an ideological puppet on the court. Now that they've put this (I don't know what) on, Rehnquist will probably feel as if he can retire in peace.

My guess is that the Bush team is going to find the most conservative woman they can find once Rehnquist steps down.

[Prometheus]

I just hope this doesn't bring an end to the filibuster truce. Good thing he didn't nominate gonzales - that would have broken the truce for sure.

[belverron]

Seriously. I guess they thought there wasn't enough support for Gonzales even among Republicans... and they were probably right.

[ibm]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050720/...o/scotus_legal

a little bit of his background.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Prometheus I just hope this doesn't bring an end to the filibuster truce. Good thing he didn't nominate gonzales - that would have broken the truce for sure.

I hope it does end the truce.

The conservatives would've won that fight without a fight. The filibuster shouldn't be allowed.

[oranged]

Why doesn't Bush just nominate David Duke and get it over with. He doesn't need politics, vote don't matter anymore, the elections are rigged. I suppose the fascist adminastration is trying to avoid a rebelious revolution. Give the a message from us communists. Tell them they failed.

[Whodoe!]

Duke is playing with some old communists and probably too busy.

http://www.davidduke.com/index.php?p=261 :)

[Dirty Name]

Quote by: bishop same thing dirty

But it's NOT the same thing. Wouldn't have bothered you if it were.