[Supreme Court] John G. Roberts Confirmed As Chief Justice

The Roberts nomination was interesting to be sure, but the next one is shaping up to be Armageddon.

As a liberal, I am for the most part, ambivalent about Robert's confirmation as CJ for the Supreme Court. Really, he is a little lighter than Renquist and at least keeps the status quo intact.

However, Sandra's "fulcrum" replacement will be the proof in the puddin'....if we don't get a justice that at least comes close to her nature, then the fight will be catastrophic. Look for every T.V. evangelist with a new hairdo and political connections to bruise the airways--I see more prayer meetings for the conservative agenda in the future countered by N.O.W. candelight vigils and protests.

 

Good luck to him, I hope he lives up to the standards of past chief justices and may his long reign on the court not be frought with controversial decisions. I think he has a good head on his shoulders and will be looking forward to reading his opinions.

 

The new Chief Justice has less judicial experience than any of the current sitting justices. I appear to be the only person who has a problem with that. Despite the precedent, GWB (a known precedent ignorer) should have promoted a sitting judge.

 

despite the fact that only three of the previous Chiefs were elevated from within the court?

 

I have noticed that and I have also noticed that Roberts has yet to actually answer a question--he wouldn't even give a straight answer on his favorite movie for chrisake!

Yes, I have reservations, but I don't think he will be any different than Renquist, like I said: status quo

 

ahhh yes...winning the Presidential election has allowed W to pack the court. To the victor goes the spoils, gentlemen. I look forward to many, many years of a conservative court! It's a great day to be an American!

 

So you can only be an American if you're conservative?

 

texxx needs some thing to cheer on these days

 

I supported Roberts and think he will make a good Chief Justice. No Worries has a point about experience and it would've been nice to see a judge with more bench experience appointed but other than that I think he's an excellent choice. Of course he's a conservative but he seems to be fairly clear minded and objective and I don't see him as being even as much of a radical as Rhenquist. I expect he will probably be a more pragmatic justice taking into account many factors in his rulings and for conservatives I get the feeling he might dissapoint them and end up ruling more like Kennedy and O'Connor.

 

Nor should he have to.....no justice has ever been required to do that.

 

As basso already mentioned, elevating a sitting judge is out of the norm with respect to precedent.

 

I'm not sure if you heard ...but Roberts is replacing conservative.

It's a great day to eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.

 

But it is such a bad idea. Imagine getting a new boss out of the blue with little no experience. Compare and contrast that with getiing a new boss who was promoted from within.

 

I guess I am okay with Roberts. I really thought Scalia should have been made CJ and Roberts an associate. Really, Bush should be packing the court with super-conservatives, especially considering that the GOP controls all of Congress. I will be pretty pissed if Roberts ends up as a Kennedy/O'Conner clone and/or O'Conner's replacement is not a pro-life conservative. Bush needs to reward those who have put him into office.

 

Wow...thats funny, it's only an appointment to the highest court in the land as the highest member, you are right Odds, he should answer one question about his ideology or belief systems.

Did you happen to catch the Clarence Thomas hearings? Take away all the long-dong-silver stuff and he was asked tough questions about his character and opinions. That is to be expected. Sorry, I'll take Arlen Specter's word over yours--thanks

BUt, I digress, I am not concerned with the appointment. As I said in my earlier post, he will be Renquist light--status quo served.

 

No, you're not the only one. While I'm not sure about any of the sitting justices, I was suprised that it wasn't Scalia that was promoted.

I am disappointed in the Senate for not digging deeper. Why was someone who is so relatively inexperienced for the Chief Justice position allowed to go through confirmation so easily. It should be harder for him. This is the highest position on the highest court in the land. It should be difficult and the standards should be set ridiculously high. Maybe he is the right person for the job. We now won't know until it's too late.

 

I don't believe Scalia was a good or even serious choice for Chief Justice because he lacks the temperament to be Chief Justice. While Rhenquist was a strong conservative he also had the respect of the rest of justices and worked well with all of them. Scalia has publicly chastised other Justices and doesn't seem to work well with the others. Part of the job of the Chief Justices is to maintain decorum and the smooth operation of the court and Scalia wouldn't be able to do that.

As for demanding that Bush appoint another Scalia its doubtful that someone that strident would pass. While yes Republicans are in control of the Senate their control isn't overwhelming while they aren't a monolithic group. With GW Bush lagging in polls and insider trading allegations dogging Frist discipline among Senate Republicans is at an all time low. Another Scalia could very well be likely be defeated as many Repubs who aren't as conservative as GW Bush or are facing tough reelection in swing states vote against him.

Roberts on most counts was about the best choice that Bush could make and I think that was reflected in the overwhelming margin that he passed by.

 

I'd be careful about that if I were you...

 

You do have a point....