John G.Roberts, Jr. Bush's Pick for Supreme Court!

It's John G. Roberts, Jr!


The AP has just relased this

Here is a link
AP: Appellate court judge Roberts is Bush pick

This guy is awesome and has firends on the right & left!!

What a great pick!! Great move for President Bush!! And our nation!

He's a joke. Been rejected before. An activist extremist.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Against the grain of America as usual, the 50 year old now nominated for lifetime appointment is on the record against Roe V. Wade (a ruling most Americans do not wish overturned).

(Buffalo, NY - AP) — A Buffalo native who sits on the US Court of Appeals in Washington DC is on the short list of nominees to the Supreme Court.

Fifty-year-old John G. Roberts, Junior has been widely cited for his strong anti-abortion views.

The conservative was a lawyer for the Reagan administration and also served as clerk for Chief Justice Rehnquist.

Roberts has been widely quoted for a brief he wrote while working for the Reagan administration saying that Roe versus Wade was quote, "wrongly decided and should be overturned".

(Copyright 2005 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

Full background at Independent Judiciary.

Reproductive Rights. s a Deputy Solicitor General, Mr. Roberts co-wrote a Supreme Court brief in Rust v. Sullivan,1 for the first Bush administration, which argued that the government could prohibit doctors in federally-funded family planning programs from discussing abortions with their patients. The brief not only argued that the regulations were constitutional, notwithstanding the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade, but it also made the broader argument that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided - an argument unnecessary to defend the regulation. The Supreme Court sided with the government on the narrower grounds that the regulation was constitutional.

Environmental Issues. As a student, Mr. Roberts wrote two law review articles arguing for an expansive reading of the Contracts and Takings clauses of the Constitution, taking positions that would restrict Congress' ability to protect the environment. As a member of the Solicitor General's office, Mr. Roberts was the lead counsel for the United States in the Supreme Court case Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation, in which the government argued that private citizens could not sue the federal government for violations of environmental regulations.

Civil Rights. After a Supreme Court decision effectively nullified certain sections of the Voting Rights Act, Roberts was involved in the Reagan administration's effort to prevent Congress from overturning the Supreme Court's action.6 The Supreme Court had recently decided that certain sections of the Voting Rights Act could only be violated by intentional discrimination and not by laws that had a discriminatory effect, despite a lack of textual basis for this interpretation in the statute. Roberts was part of the effort to legitimize that decision and to stop Congress from overturning it.

Religion in Schools. While working with the Solicitor General's office, Mr. Roberts co-wrote an amicus brief on behalf of the Bush administration, in which he argued that public high schools can include religious ceremonies in their graduation programs, a view the Supreme Court rejected.

He's been rejected as too extreme before.

John Roberts, US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit Educated at Harvard. Roberts would be a hard sell. He was rejected by the Judiciary Committee under Bush I as being too extreme. He was recently appointed by George W. Bush to the DC Appeals Circuit. John Roberts had been a prominent lawyer working for the Republican Party and the Bush & Reagan Administrations.

Have a nice day.

[edit on 19-7-2005 by RANT]

Originally posted by Boatphone
This guy is awesome and has firends on the right & left!!

What a great pick!! Great move for President Bush!! And our nation!

The White House will do as much as they can to paint him as a moderate and 'not that bad'. Once the dems begin to oppose him they will launch a smear campaigns against the dems as being unreasonable.

This guy is a hardcore religious conservative. This is not a great move by President Bush and for the nation, it is a move against the majority who dont want Roe vs Wade overturned. But this of course doesnt matter, because he is doing the work of god. The United States is gods nation, not the peoples right?

thanks,
drfunk

Not a comprimise candidate at all. Young at that. What happened to Bush's promise to nominate someone that "represents America". Sandra O'Connor was a woman. This is another white male extreme conservative. Time for the democrats to use the filibuster.

Agreed.

It's filibuster bait, to force the issue, widen the divide.

Most people in America won't even take the time to find out for themselves what this man stands for, they'll just listen to the words of their favorite pundit and obey.

Sad.

The division of America is made so much easier by the apathy of Americans.

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Agreed.

It's filibuster bait, to force the issue, widen the divide.

And some nice red meat to get the dogs off Rove. It's pretty lame all around. Might as well call this "Rove's nominee."

I'm sorry, I just can't tell the joke post from the real post...


Are you guys actually serious in saying this will cause division in America?

Or that the dems will filibuster??



Roberts IS a solid pick. There's no questioning his brilliance when it comes to the law whether you like him or no. He's also very accomplished for someone so young.
If it was a Democrat president in office, would you expect the president to pick a conservative? No. There's no difference here.


www.washingtonpost.com...

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) had previously identified him as a choice who would not trigger a Democratic filibuster.

Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), the Senate minority leader, said, "The president has chosen someone with suitable legal credentials, but that is not the end of our inquiry." He said the Senate must determine whether Roberts "has a demonstrated commitment to the core American values of freedom, equality and fairness."

And as far as Roe v. Wade....in that brief he was quoting the (first) Bush administrations position on R v. W.


Anyway, he'll pass with around 70-80 yeas.

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Agreed.

It's filibuster bait, to force the issue, widen the divide.

And some nice red meat to get the dogs off Rove. It's pretty lame all around. Might as well call this "Rove's nominee."

Yep, Bush nominated this man to get the attention off Rove. If Rovegate hadn't been going on he would have probably nominated a moderate. But nominating this guy he hopes the Progressives and media will turn their attention away from the scandal. It's so obvious, yet most people are probably too stup....are not bright enough to realize it.

I didn't even think of that, but I suppose it's right. I've been perpetually surprised by Rove's presence in the media. His sort are much more content to remain behind the scenes at all times. They let men like our beloved POTUS take all the heat.

The media asked a few tough questions the other night, I'm very curious if that tenacity is the new norm, of if, in fact, Rove is the guy designed to take the heat off this appointee...

Think about the benefits of using a high ranking cabinet member to throw to the wolves to get a right wing abortion opponent in the supreme court.

I think Rove may actually be the sacrificial lamb, not Roberts. Which position has more control over the direction of the country? Rove can call Bush any time he wants as a civilian, to 'advise' him, he doesn't need the title or position to maintain his role. On the other hand, Roberts, if he isn't confirmed, won't be able to affect the balance of the SCOTUS.

A conservative President nominating a conservative Supreme Court Judge.

Who would have thought that?

Whoever Bush picked was going to get demonized. Democrats are going into Buffy the Vampire Slayer mode as we speak.

Originally posted by Flinx
Not a comprimise candidate at all. Young at that. What happened to Bush's promise to nominate someone that "represents America". Sandra O'Connor was a woman. This is another white male extreme conservative. Time for the democrats to use the filibuster.

What are you talking about, did you expect him to pick a liberal?? President Bush ran on a campain promise that he would pick a "strict constructionlist", and he was voting into office.

And, now he has picked a "strict constructionalist", just as he said!!

He has very right to do so!! Hs is the POTUS!!

John Roberts will be confirmed no question, and rigthly so. Also, when he made statments against roe v. wade, he was a lawyer not a judge!!

moving to PTS Political Figures found here: politics.abovetopsecret.com...