Bush Nominates Roberts as Chief Justice

Good move. Only 2 confirmayion battles instead of 3. Roberts seems qualified. I never trust any of these guys, remember how justice Kennedy appointe by Nixon was supposed to be conservative?

 

Do you mean by George H.W. Bush?

 

Good Move. Maybe he will appoint Michael McConnell to replace O'Connor. Is anybody besides me starting to see why I thought the Supreme Court was such an important issue last year. Is it possible that one more justice might retire in the next few years. This could drastically change the direction of our nation for the next generation at least.

Joseph Botwinick

 

O'Connor has retired.
Rehnquist is dead.
Stevens is 85.

Chances are that Bush will have at least one more appointment to make.

His decisions will without a doubt shape the court for the next 3 decades.

Personally, I would have liked to seen Roberts remain as O'Connor's replacement, McConnell chosen as Rehnquist's replacement, and, if it happens, Brown as Stevens' replacement.

That, I think, would be a wonderful makeup for the court over the next several years.

 

I agree with you Bro. James. I am not in favor of Roberts as Chief Justice. I think that we need a Protestant as Chief Justice for one thing. For another thing, I am not sure if Roberts is a social conservative or just a fiscal and legal conservative. I think that we can say that it could be worse but I don't think that Roberts as Chief Justice is anything to write home about. Ike thought Earl Warren would be great and Earl Warren turned out to be your worst nightmare.

 

Considering Bush's very poor standing with the public at the moment he really had no practical choice but to nominate Roberts for Chief Justice in order to avoid a political fight that he might not be able to win right now.

 

Serious question here: What is the real practical difference between a SC justice and the Cheif Justice of the SC? Does the Cheif get more than one vote...does the title really mean anything and make a difference, or is it simply an honorary title with no real meaning...kinda like it is with the current Queen of England?

Joseph Botwinick

 

The Chief chairs the Judicial Conference, conveys to Congress the findings of the conference on legislative matters, and delivers the "State of the Judiciary" address. Besides these "duties" the chief supervises the administration of the court and presides over the Court's public sessions and conferences. The legal decisions of the Chief carry no more weight than other Justice.

 

IOW,

Nothing really that special. Thanks.

Joseph Botwinick

 

exactly

 

The chief decides who reviews which case loads.

I would also say that he is seen as a figure head and reflects the nature of the court.

The court of Rehnquist, for the past 10 years or so, was a rare acception. Most CJs usually reflect the views of the majority members.

I really don't think Bush would have a problem getting more nominees through with the Senate makeup like it is. I think Republicans would like a good filibuster fight again to draw Americans' attention to the minority Democrats once again wasting taxpayor money by stalling a vote. The polls were showing that the Republicans were looking better than the Dems when talk about the nuclear option was floating around.

All I can say is, I hope the far-righters are wrong about Roberts and the left-wingers are correct. That would make my day. Of course, we will not know until he is on the court and ruling.

 

The Chief Justice also presides over impeachment trials and swears in the President.

Bush is weak politically, thanks in part to the Baptist Bush Bashers, of which there is a surplus of such closed books.

Roberts is silk-stocking from the high-class lake shore of Lake Michigan in northern Indiana. He is ivy league.

I think Catholicism is sick so I am not too happy about him. Also, I tire of the ivy league quickly. If the GOP had had any power, they should have put Bork in as Chief Justice. The Democrats are also sick for their sick political platform that calls for abortion on demand.

 

You are certainly entitled to your preference, but the Constitution forbids religious tests for public office. Also, justices are to interpret the Constitution, not rule from a sectarian position.

 

His father was a white-collar steel company executive, not a blue-collar union worker.

 

Look, I am a born and raised Hoosier and let me assure you that Roberts was upper class all of his life. I forget the area where he lived but it was a lot nicer than the Calumet. But I never heard of Roberts before, but then the Calumet is Democrat and some distance from the Wabash River.

On the subject of Catholicism, I think that Catholicism is officially hostile to Protestantism. I am not sure that we have a Protestant on the court. Ginsburg has the so-called Jewish seat. A lot of the justices seem to be secular. I just think that we have done enough for Catholicism and that their world view is conflicting with American foundations. How can I expect much of Roberts?

 

No, the normal Hoosier is not an ivy leaguer but more of a rustic, a country bumpkin, a clown--the opposite of a New Yorker. The east is crowded, dirty, and expensive. I don't know why easterners are so snobbish, but they sure are.

Oh, no, he lived in a nice area along Lake Michigan I read. That property is not cheap. Then he went off to Harvard, which is where he picked up the ivy league stuff. Bush went to Harvard and Yale but he acts like the class clown more than he acts like the upper class. Maybe that is the difference between old money and new money. I am not sure that Roberts is a social conservative. I think that he is a fiscal conservative and a legal conservative. Bush evidently picked him because he is non-controversial and Bush is politically weak. Also, he is another sop to the Roman Catholics. I don't believe in this stuff about Evangelicals and Catholics Together that Chuck Colson was pedalling a few years ago. I think that the SBC is on the front lines; and if the Catholics show up, fine, and if they don't, who is surprised? I would have preferred a Protestant social conservative, but one has to take what one can get, doesn't one?