Some thoughts on our soon-to-be Chief Justice
I just heard Johnathan Turley, a law professor, on MSNBC discussing the imminent confirmation of John Roberts for Chief Justice. Turley was wondering why some Senators seemed to take it easy on Roberts when Robert Bork was so harshly treated and Roberts shares many views with Bork.
There's an easy answer: Robert Bork is an asshole and John Roberts is not.
No judicial appointment has ever upset me more than Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court (and that includes Priscilla Owen, and check out the May archives to see how much I dislike her). Bork is a biased, elitist, arrogant, intellectual bigot and hypocrite. Roberts, on the other hand, is not any of those things. As a Supreme Court Justice, Bork would have been an activist judge of the worst kind. From what I heard from Roberts in the latest hearings, he will not be an activist judge.
I have said it before, and I will say it again. I strongly opposed Bork's nomination, but I fully supported Rehnquist's nomination as Chief Justice. I won't go into the reasons for that support, but I will say that, regardless of his views or his future rulings, if Roberts conducts the Supreme Court in the way Rehnquist did, I will be happy.
I would have loved for Roberts to give more answers about his views on specific issues, but I was satisfied by his explanations of how he would function in the role of Chief Justice. See, regardless of a judge's personal views, beliefs, or desires, that judge has to have a commitment to the rule of law. There are times at which such personal views, beliefs, and desires have to yield to the commitment to the law. From what I have heard from Roberts, I think he will do just that.
In his hearings, Roberts repeatedly explained his previous government legal work as reflecting the fact that he was an advocate taking the position of his employer. He also explained that his role as Chief Justice would be very different from his role as an advocate. Those explanations are reasonable and plausible, and they, along with Roberts's general demeanor and personality, cause me to think he will be similar to Rehnquist.
I really hope that is the case.
There's an easy answer: Robert Bork is an asshole and John Roberts is not.
No judicial appointment has ever upset me more than Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court (and that includes Priscilla Owen, and check out the May archives to see how much I dislike her). Bork is a biased, elitist, arrogant, intellectual bigot and hypocrite. Roberts, on the other hand, is not any of those things. As a Supreme Court Justice, Bork would have been an activist judge of the worst kind. From what I heard from Roberts in the latest hearings, he will not be an activist judge.
I have said it before, and I will say it again. I strongly opposed Bork's nomination, but I fully supported Rehnquist's nomination as Chief Justice. I won't go into the reasons for that support, but I will say that, regardless of his views or his future rulings, if Roberts conducts the Supreme Court in the way Rehnquist did, I will be happy.
I would have loved for Roberts to give more answers about his views on specific issues, but I was satisfied by his explanations of how he would function in the role of Chief Justice. See, regardless of a judge's personal views, beliefs, or desires, that judge has to have a commitment to the rule of law. There are times at which such personal views, beliefs, and desires have to yield to the commitment to the law. From what I have heard from Roberts, I think he will do just that.
In his hearings, Roberts repeatedly explained his previous government legal work as reflecting the fact that he was an advocate taking the position of his employer. He also explained that his role as Chief Justice would be very different from his role as an advocate. Those explanations are reasonable and plausible, and they, along with Roberts's general demeanor and personality, cause me to think he will be similar to Rehnquist.
I really hope that is the case.
posted by WCharles @ 9/29/2005 09:20:00 AM
2 Comments:
Good post. I've been looking forward to your comments on Roberts.
"See, regardless of a judge's personal views, beliefs, or desires, that judge has to have a commitment to the rule of law. There are times at which such personal views, beliefs, and desires have to yield to the commitment to the law."
I agree with that statement. I will categorically admit that I am opposed to abortion, but it is the law and specific judicial decisions must be made in that light, unless Roe v. Wade is overturned. I agree with you, it sounds like Roberts will rule that way. But, a question, does your second sentence above imply that at times the opposite is true, that sometimes one's personal views, beliefs and desires take precedence over established law?
"But, a question, does your second sentence above imply that at times the opposite is true, that sometimes one's personal views, beliefs and desires take precedence over established law?"
In a word, no.
The key phrase in your question is "take precedence." Personal views and beliefs can be expressed within the framework of the existing law, or such views and beliefs can be expressed as a reason for wanting to change the law. However, personal views and beliefs should not alone form the basis for creating or changing law. This approach allows for changes in the law, but prevents drastic, constant change.
Keep in mind also that the Supreme Court has a unique role. Usually, the Supremes deal with issues that are not black and white. There is lots of gray, and the results can have a direct and large impact on everyone's lives. Because of this, a variety of views and beliefs is a good thing, for it leads to serious and thoughtful and thorough discussion.
Rehnquist was a good example of what I am talking about. He was the master of writing dissenting opinions that later became law. He would establish a basis in law for change. In almost every opinion by Rehnquist with which I disagreed, I had to admit that he gave a basis in the law.
That is basically the way he ran the Court, and that is why I hope Roberts behaves the same way.
Post a Comment
<< Home