Supreme Court Chief Justice nominee John Roberts smiles during questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in this Sept. 14, 2005 file photo. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak-File)
Posted on 09/29/2005 8:56:08 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - John Glover Roberts Jr. won confirmation as the 17th chief justice of the United States Thursday, overwhelmingly confirmed by the Senate to lead the Supreme Court through turbulent social issues for generations to come.
The Senate voted 78-22 to confirm Roberts — a 50-year-old U.S. Appeals judge from the Washington suburb of Chevy Chase, Md. — as the successor to the late William H. Rehnquist, who died earlier this month. All of the Senate's majority Republicans, and about half of the Democrats, voted for Roberts.
Underscoring the rarity of a chief justice's confirmation, senators answered the roll by standing one by one at their desks as their names were called, instead of voting and leaving the chamber.
Roberts is the first new Supreme Court justice since 1994. Before becoming a federal judge, Roberts was one of the nation's best appellate lawyers, arguing 39 cases — many in front of the same eight justices he will now lead as chief justice.
He won 25 of those cases.
Roberts watched the Senate vote on television from the White House's Roosevelt Room. He and his wife Jane, were then to have lunch with President Bush and first lady Laura Bush, followed by a swearing-in ceremony at the White House so he could take his seat in time for the new court session Monday.
Under Roberts, justices will tackle issues like assisted suicide, campaign finance law and abortion this year, with questions about religion, same-sex marriage, the government's war on terrorism and human cloning looming in the future.
"With the confirmation of John Roberts, the Supreme Court will embark upon a new era in its history, the Roberts era," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., whose 55 GOP members unanimously voted for the multimillionaire judge. "And for many years to come, long after many of us have left public service, the Roberts court will be deliberating on some of the most difficult and fundamental questions of U.S. law."
Twenty-two Democrats opposed Roberts, saying he could turn out to be as conservative as justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court anchors on the right.
"At the end of the day, I have too many unanswered questions about the nominee to justify confirming him to this lifetime seat," said Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
Anti-abortion and abortion rights activists both have their hopes pinned on Roberts, a former government lawyer in the Reagan and first Bush administrations. While Roberts is solidly conservative and his wife, Jane, volunteers for Feminists for Life, both sides were eager to see how he will vote on abortion cases.
Roberts told senators during his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings that past Supreme Court rulings carry weight, including the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in 1973. He also said he agreed with the 1965 Supreme Court ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut that established the right of privacy in the sale and use of contraceptives.
But he tempered that by saying Supreme Court justices can overturn rulings.
During four days of sometimes testy questioning by Democrats, Roberts refused to hint how he would rule on cases.
"If the Constitution says that the little guy should win, then the little guy's going to win in the court before me," Roberts told senators. "But if the Constitution says that the big guy should win, well then the big guy's going to win because my obligation is to the Constitution."
Over and over, he has assured lawmakers his rulings would be guided by his understanding of the facts of cases, the law and the Constitution, not by his personal views. "My faith and my religious beliefs do not play a role," said Roberts, who is Catholic.
Roberts' confirmation brings the number of Catholics on the court to a historic high of four. The Roman Catholic Church strongly opposes abortion.
Democrats, even as they complained about his Reagan-era opinions and the White House's refusal to release his paperwork from the George H.W. Bush administration, acknowledged his brilliance and judicial demeanor.
"I've taken him at his word that he does not have an ideological agenda and he will be his own man as chief justice ," said Sen. Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary. "I take him as his word that he will steer the court to serve as an appropriate check on the potential abuses of presidential power, not just today but tomorrow."
Republicans showered praise on Roberts, and said the justices on the court like him too. "There have already been indications from members of the court about their liking the fact that Judge Roberts is going to be the new chief justice," said Judiciary Committee chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., who shepherded the nomination out of his committee on a 13-5 vote.
Roberts has the potential of leading the Supreme Court for decades. Not since John Marshall, confirmed in 1801 at 45, has there been a younger chief justice.
Roberts also will hold a record of sorts — nominated to succeed two different Supreme Court justices within seven weeks. Bush originally named him to succeed retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in July. Rehnquist's death led to the second nomination on Sept. 6, and Roberts now will be confirmed as chief justice while O'Connor remains on the court until the president selects a new replacement.
Supreme Court Chief Justice nominee John Roberts smiles during questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in this Sept. 14, 2005 file photo. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak-File)
Oooooh, they stood up. How awesome. < |:/~
Swearing in ceremony this afternoon at the White House after lunch with the President..
3 PM ET in The East Room of the White House
Justice Stevens will do the honors.
Gosh, I didn't know that was covered in the Constitution!
The things you learn in newspapers.
Let the knife figtht games begin on the next nominee.
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts
God bless al eGore for inventing the internet.. lol ;-)
Ok, good. Now on to new business.
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
.Now JANICE ROGERS BROWN!!!!!!!!!!!More than ever!......
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts
Now on to step #2. I'm betting on an announcement at the end of the day tomorrow to beat the news cycle.
The media can then be flooded with media buys/bio's of the new nominee....preempts the left's rage.
As soon as Roberts is sworn in, President should announce the nomination of someone to the right of Justice Thomas.
Paul McCartney music cue... DEMS ON THE RUN, DEMS ON THE RUN!
What! No funny pics or graphics? Just a typo face? You're losing your touch.
YEAH HUH! ;^)
We can only hope that this and only this time the Democrats are right.
Even Anna Nicole is thrilled..(her case is coming up)
Well here goes...we should know by December (when they start issuing rulings) whether this guy is another Souter or Rehnquist.
If he's another Souter, that's the final straw for me.
priscilla owens next please! Then it wont matter for years to come who is in the white house.
For some, I am sure it required an effort.
You can't know how tough it must be to stand... for those without a spine.
I'm betting on an announcement at the end of the day tomorrow to beat the news cycle.
The media can then be flooded with media buys/bio's of the new nominee....preempts the left's rage.
----
But,, but... that wouldn't be compassionate or FaiR? lol
The dems need to vent their hatred yaknow,,
UnFoRtunately, they have an endless supply of it to purge , it appears no matter who or when the next nominee is placed in the Gauntlet Start position.
Wait until the one after the next one comes up,, hair plugs may be littering the Senate floor.
See?
Does anybody have a list showing how each senator voted?
Excellent photo, I hope he becomes a great Chief!
I wonder why this was mentioned?
And then there is Mayland's Barbara Mikulski. When she stands you think she is still sitting.
Okay, congrats to the new Chief Justice.
Now the real battle begins, next nomination please.
Seriously, especially when all it takes nowadays is owning a 3BR Cape Cod on Long Island.
Congratulations Mr. Chief Justice.
22 Dems vote no? They are even a minority within their own caucus. Shows what extremists they are.
EEEEUWWWWW! Barf-o-rama! That's the last time I ever challenge you to a pic. You're dangerous! ;^)
...Over and over, he has assured lawmakers his rulings would be guided by his understanding of the facts of cases, the law and the Constitution, not by his personal views...."
Fair enough, but would prefer "...guided by the Constitution, the Constitution, and the Constitution..."
Just my fantasy world peeking through.
God's speed Mr. Chief Justice!
Top sends
She gets a short shift?
Sorry to skirt the issue.
Wow!
28 Democratic votes for Roberts???!!!
That's UNHEARD of!!!
Do you mean to tell me that over half of the Senate Democrats didn't stick to their guns and try to fight this oh-so evil, eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevil man????
I guess the Dems are a bunch of snot nosed, All Hat and No Cattle, gutless little punks!
WOOHOO!!
Jack.
"Generations to come"? He's 50, not 2.
| Sept. 29, 2005 | Final Senate Vote |
| Accepted by a vote of 78-22: | ||
| Republicans | 55-0 | |
| Democrats | 22-22 | |
| Independent | 1 |
|
| Republicans Alexander (TN) Allard (CO) Allen (VA) Bennett (UT) Bond (MO) Brownback (KS) Bunning (KY) Burns (MT) Burr (NC) Chafee (RI) Chambliss (GA) Coburn (OK) Cochran (MS) Coleman (MN) Collins (ME) Cornyn (TX) Craig (ID) Crapo (ID) DeMint (SC) DeWine (OH) Dole (NC) Domenici (NM) Ensign (NV) Enzi (WY) Frist (TN) Graham (SC) Grassley (IA) Gregg (NH) Hagel (NE) Hatch (UT) Hutchison (TX) Inhofe (OK) Isakson (GA) Kyl (AZ) Lott (MS) Lugar (IN) Martinez (FL) McCain (AZ) McConnell (KY) Murkowski (AK) Roberts (KS) Santorum (PA) Sessions (AL) Shelby (AL) Smith (OR) Snowe (ME) Specter (PA) Stevens (AK) Sununu (NH) Talent (MO) Thomas (WY) Thune (SD) Vitter (LA) Voinovich (OH) Warner (VA) |
Vote Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y |
Democrats Akaka (HI) Baucus (MT) Bayh (IN) Biden (DE) Bingaman (NM) Boxer (CA) Byrd (WV) Cantwell (WA) Carper (DE) Clinton (NY) Conrad (ND) Corzine (NJ) Dayton (MN) Dodd (CT) Dorgan (ND) Durbin (IL) Feingold (WI) Feinstein (CA) Harkin (IA) Inouye (HI) Johnson (SD) Kennedy (MA) Kerry (MA) Kohl (WI) Landrieu (LA) Lautenberg (NJ) Leahy (VT) Levin (MI) Lieberman (CT) Lincoln (AR) Mikulski (MD) Murray (WA) Nelson, Ben (NE) Nelson, Bill (FL) Obama (IL) Pryor (AR) Reed, J. (RI) Reid, H. (NV) Rockefeller (WV) Salazar (CO) Sarbanes (MD) Schumer (NY) Stabenow (MI) Wyden (OR) Independent |
Vote N Y N N Y N Y N Y N Y N N Y Y N Y N N N Y N N Y Y N Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N N Y Y N N N Y
|
Does she wax her armpits?
Gosh, I didn't know that was covered in the Constitution!
Almost very law passed raises issues of due process and equal protection.
The courts must be involved, the Constitution requires it.
Rehnquist attempted to curb the rights of corporations, the liberal judges somewhat supported extending the rights of corporations. Haven't heard much on the new judge's take on corporate rights.
Janice Rogers Brown is only a 15:1 horse in my estimation.
I'm betting on someone from Latin Stables.
Could be a stallion or a filly, but I'll bet money that it's not a gelding.
On what issues could Thomas be surpassed?
Senate vote results from Senate web site
http://www.c-span.org/congress/roberts_senate.asp
apology for hughness of results posted.
Best you learn more about 14th Amendment privileges and immunities.
There was no good reason that John Roberts shouldn't have been unanimously approved, or at the least 90-95 votes. William Rehnquist was approved 65-33 for Chief, with 3 less votes then during his original vote to sit on the high court. Rehnquist was a well known GOP partisan. Roberts is a highly qualified jurist. Ginsberg, Beyer and Scalia flew through the Senate. Guess when you're out of power for 11 years, things change. S**t happens. LOL
Since the DUmocrats are worried about getting "another Scalia or Thomas" then why not get them all worked up into tizzy over a nomination for an "EXTREME" conservative.
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.