It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


POLITICS: Roberts Declines to Explain Group Listing

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 09:38 AM
John G. Roberts, President Bush's nominee, for the Supreme Court, declined to comment on, or explain, the listing of his name as a member of the Federalist Society. Roberts, who was listed in the leadership directory, for the Federalists, has claimed no memory of being a member. com
WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee John Roberts declined Monday to explain why he was listed in a Federalist Society leadership directory when the White House says he doesn't recall being a member of the conservative legal organization.

Roberts, nominated by President Bush last week to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, was asked by a reporter about the discrepancy during a morning get-acquainted meeting with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), D-Calif.

He smiled but didn't reply.

"I don't think he wants to take any questions," Feinstein interjected during the session with photographers and reporters that was part of the meeting in her office with the Supreme Court nominee.

"No, no, no thanks," Roberts

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

This could prove to be a big problem, for the nominee. He is known to be conservative in his judicial and political views, so being a member of this organization would probably not be a stumbling block in the nomination process, were it not for the fact that Roberts has denied even being a member.

Related News Links:

Related Discussion Threads:
Bush Nominates Roberts for Supreme Court

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 09:45 AM
This shows how desperate the Democrats are. This is the Wikipedia description of the Federalist Society:

The Federalist Society began at the University of Chicago Law School and Yale Law School in 1982 as a student organization that challenged what it saw as the orthodox liberal ideology found in most law schools. In its Statement of Principles, the Society states that it is founded on the principles that the state exists to preserve freedom, that the separation of powers is central to the United States' constitutional form of government, and that the role of the judicial branch is to say what the law is, not what the law should be.

The Society currently has chapters at 145 law schools in the United States, including all of the top-20-ranked law schools, as well as a parent organization for conservatives, moderates, and libertarians who are interested in the current state of the legal order, the Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies.


Sounds like a great organization to me! Why are the libs trying to make it sound like he was a member of al Qaeda or the Communist Party or something?

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 09:56 AM

They're probably jumping on the fact that Roberts has denied joining the group much less being in a directory of "leaders". That is the only reason, I can see, for the Dems to be so up-in-arms about it.

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 10:12 AM
I just checked their website and he is not listed on the leader list. All I found is some minor mention of his name in some documents and none of them list John G. Roberts all I could find was a reference to a John Roberts. Could very well not be one and the same person if you ask me.

Me thinks he may not even be a member and is going to let the Democrats make themselves look like fools, since he stated he does not recall being a member.

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 10:22 AM

People For the American Way & their position on Federalist Society

for #1, does not have his name on the known list of illuminaries in Federalist Society (but, it is only a partial & older listing)

and #2, the PFAW site:

lists these agendas of the Federalist Society

*promotes far right positions
*reforming current legal order
*rollback civil rights
*advocates school vouchers
*rollback reproductive choice

Etc, Etc, Etc

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 10:25 AM
It's a conservative organization, he's a biggie. Unless he's trying to pass as more moderate....when maybe he's not.

If it's a great group as dj says why would he want to distance himself from it? First it was 'he is not and never has been!' then it was 'he has no recollection of...'. Surely he's not trying to be deceitful....we know how the Repubs eschew that!

And I've not noticed any libs and dems having much at all to say about this as fact, I keep hearing them say how pleasantly surprised with his nomination they are....he' so moderately conservative.

edit to add: The roll back of civil rights might be one reason he'd like to distance himself from this group.....

[edit on 25-7-2005 by frayed1]

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 10:26 AM
My gosh...Bush nominated a conservative... Why couldn't Bush nominate someone who's a moderate, like Ruth Bader Ginsburg? I mean, despite all the hype and decisions in the court, since Supreme Court appointments is more about politics and less about interpretting the Constitution, she must have been very middle of the road if not a little conservative to get a 96-vote approval in the senate.

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 11:13 AM
Perhaps I read something wrong. I did not see where Roberts said anything. It looks to me like he was told to keep quiet and let the White House answer all the questions. Nowhere in the article is he quoted as not remembering. Am I missing something?

WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee John Roberts declined Monday to explain why he was listed in a Federalist Society leadership directory when the White House says he doesn't recall being a member of the conservative legal organization

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 12:05 PM
Roberts is IMHO a "stealth Scalia" - a hard right guy who has not left much of a paper trail. This is probably why he was picked.

Still, I don't think the Dems will be able to unearth enough to stop his appointment.

We won't know for sure until the "Convert To Christianity or Die" bill is ruled constitutional

posted on Jul, 25 2005 @ 03:34 PM
Why the libs are fussing over Roberts' association with the Federalist Society? It's a sheer nonsense and a complete waste of BS time on the libs' part.

Get Roberts a bench in the SC as soon as possible.

top topics


log in