“While I will not ask Judge Roberts whether he would overrule Roe, there are, in my opinion, entirely appropriate questions on his jurisprudential views that might be asked,” the chairman, Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, says in the 1,436-word statement, provided by his office.
“For example,” the statement continues, “I consider it appropriate to question him as to his views on stare decisis, or following precedents, as well as his views with respect to the importance of stability in the law, which Judge Roberts has identified, along with ‘modesty,’ as one of his lodestones.”
This is the worst cop-out. Either a woman’s right to choose is important…critically important…or it is not. Just ask the fucking question. Are you with me, or are you with the Christo-fascists?
Even if Specter won’t ask if Roberts supports Roe directly, he should certainly ask both whether he believes Roe was correctly decided, and whether he believes that the constitution supports the unenumerated rights of privacy for the citizenry.
It’s another national tragedy that Roberts will be approved regardless of whether his record is revealed or not. Short of being caught having sex with a 4-legged creature, I don’t see him being rejected and I don’t see enough courageous Democrats stepping up to block him.
I understand the calculus of silence and so-called compromise the Dems use to justify their “you’ve got to go along to get along” approach to government, but because they do this so often on almost every issue the Repubs put up, it’s no longer compromise, it’s capitulation they’re engaged in, and it’s no good for anyone.
So, he would prefer to just dance around the edge of the issue rather than meet it head on. What a pitiful dweeb. Arlen, check to see that you still have a scrotum and just ask the f*cking question!!!
Pathetic. But not surprising. We can’t handle the truth, don’t ya know. That is the standard way of operating in politics. Didn’t one of the Supreme Court Justices say it was better for the American people not to know the actual vote count in Florida? Heads in the sand. Head up asses. Anything but the truth. Protect yourselves. I’m so sick of spineless non-leaders that I could scream.
I’m disgusted with our Fearless Leaders. Who and where are they?
Just wait and see: no “uncomfortable” questions for Roberts. Watch our Senators strike poses, assume attitudes, and generally give this man a pass.
Will he have to be confirmed twice? Once for Supreme Court and again for Chief Justice?
There are more important things to take care of in Washington, like drawing up the Articles of Impeachment for the President and his entire cabinet. And what’s t his Bush 1 and Bill Clinton alliance all about? That’s a hell of a nerve. All, ALL, the money that supports this government and this war are from our taxes. By now, most people have chosen their charity for the Katrina victims. Who’s the audience for Bill and Geo 1? That’s just crass.
then let us speak the truth.
Bill Maher said Friday night that Roe v. Wade is gone. He said we have to face it. It is gone.
I think he is probably right.
What can we do. The last chance we had was to win in 2004.
We — the universal, not personal, we — blew it.
With a weak, compromised candidate.
With the planned character assassinations in the primary of the candidates who could have won.
With a Democratic leadership that is more vested in its corporate contributors than in any of us.
Perhaps it’s the 2nd of those 3 that will always most bother me. That Kerry and Gephardt set out to destroy Howard Dean and Wesley Clark, both of whom would have made stronger candidates than Kerry, who inspired not one wisp of passion in anyone I ever met, except a couple local party insiders.
than Specter; the spouse read in one of the local papers that Feinstein will oppose Roberts’ nomination because of his anti-choice stand.
She may be a DINO at times, but I guess she can do the right thing once in a while…
John Dean will be testifying for the Democrats at Roberts’ hearing. He has a column at Findlaw you might find interesting, wherein he outlines the strategy. You can find the rather lengthy article in its entirety at http://writ.corporate.findlaw.com/dean/20050812.html and I have included excerpts here:
“Friday, Aug. 12, 2005
Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania knows his way around the Constitution; indeed, Richard Nixon considered appointing Specter to the Supreme Court. He also knows his way around Capitol Hill, where he has served since 1986. Now Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, Senator Specter is putting his expertise and experience to good use: He has sent a letter to Supreme Court nominee Judge John Roberts, asking about his “thinking on the jurisprudence” of the holding by the Rehnquist Court “which overturned almost 60 years of Congress’s power under the Commence Clause.”
This is a core issue of importance to every American – and Specter is right to raise it.
Hot-button issues like abortion, flag-burning, school prayer, homosexual rights, and the like, are of great concern to only some subset – albeit, in some cases, a large subset — of Americans. In contrast the issue of the scope of the powers of the U.S. Congress under Article I, section 8 of the Constitution – which gives Congress the power to “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states” — has significance for every American.
~snip~
Accordingly – and rightly so — in submitting specific questions to Judge Roberts, Chairman Specter has made clear that he believes the nominee must respond. Judge Ginsburg was able to refuse to answer questions not because of Canon 5, but rather because the Senate Judiciary Committee permitted her to do so. Had a majority insisted she respond, she would have had to respond, or risk not having her nomination reported out of the committee.
If Judge Roberts fails to respond to Chairman Specter’s questions, he will be playing a dangerous game of stonewalling. There is nothing in the ABA Canons that precludes him from explaining his Commerce Clause jurisprudence.
Thus, if Roberts thinks the U.S. Congress is relatively powerless under the Commerce Clause provision, he is free to say so – and it is only fair that he should. If that is his thinking, then the U.S. Senate can decide if it wants to diminish its powers by placing Judge Roberts on the High Court.
Re my post of John Dean’s column:
Choosing to fight Roberts along another tactic, thus leaving Roe v. Wade out the discussion, doesn’t imply that Specter is not going to ‘fight’ — it means he has chosen a more vulnerable issue for Roberts’ defeat.
As stated, DiFi is going to take on Roe v. Wade.