Posted on 09/22/2005 6:55:16 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
The following is the transcript of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the confirmation of Judge John G Roberts Jr, as provided by CQ Transcriptions.
SPEAKERS: U.S. SENATOR ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA) CHAIRMAN U.S. SENATOR ORRIN G. HATCH (R-UT) U.S. SENATOR CHARLES E. GRASSLEY (R-IA) U.S. SENATOR JON KYL (R-AZ) U.S. SENATOR MIKE DEWINE (R-OH) U.S. SENATOR JEFF SESSIONS (R-AL) U.S. SENATOR LINDSEY O. GRAHAM (R-SC) U.S. SENATOR JOHN CORNYN (R-TX) U.S. SENATOR SAM BROWNBACK (R-KS) U.S. SENATOR TOM COBURN (R-OK) U.S. SENATOR PATRICK J. LEAHY (D-VT) RANKING MEMBER U.S. SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY (D-MA) U.S. SENATOR JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR. (D-DE) U.S. SENATOR HERBERT KOHL (D-WI) U.S. SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D-CA) U.S. SENATOR RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD (D-WI) U.S. SENATOR CHARLES E. SCHUMER (D-NY) U.S. SENATOR RICHARD J. DURBIN (D-IL) SPECTER: The Judiciary Committee will now proceed with our executive session.
The floor schedule has votes which will be starting shortly, but our committee's going to go right ahead. There may be two votes or three votes, and if there are two votes, we will move to the 20-minute mark or so and vote and come back.
But we have a good bit of work to do this morning, so we will start right off with the committee action on the nomination of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to be chief justice of the United States.
We do not need a quorum for that, so we can start to speak.
At the outset, I want to compliment my distinguished colleague Senator Leahy for his courage in his vote yesterday. It is not easy to vote in a different manner with the thrust of the party. Some of us have had some experience at that.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The transcripts are well worth reading. I read most of them this weekend. They are also over at the Post.
Not quite sure what to make of Roberts. I need to look up a few things. It seems he has traced out a path for overturning Rowe v. Wade or Casey, but I'm not sure he'd do it. In any case I think he is a good choice and may calm down some of the politicization of the court (which Scalia would not do). His focus on the rule of law I like. The only concern I have is that he is too much the lawyer's lawyer.
Your last point is a real worry.
You can also watch all the hearings at Cspan.org.
I have the full expectation that he won't please the conservative side with policy making. But, I am also 100% confident that he won't do the same on the liberal side.
For a SCOTUS justice, that is all I ask.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.