Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $22,394
26%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 26% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: robertshearings

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • What's missing? Why did Justices Ginsburg and Stevens affirm Roberts' refusal to answer questions?

    10/01/2005 8:08:51 AM PDT · by ken5050 · 50 replies · 2,070+ views
    one man's opinion.......
    Possibly I've become far too cynical as regards the Dems and politics, but the recent comments by Justices Ginsburg and Stevens, both of whom essentially said that Roberts was absolutelty correct NOT to answer question about matters that may come before the Court, leave me flabbergasted, scratching my head, and wondering both why? and why NOW?
  • Living Constitution, R.I.P.

    09/30/2005 10:04:38 PM PDT · by strategofr · 30 replies · 1,149+ views
    nationalreview.com ^ | September 30, 2005, 4:09 p.m | Curt Levey
    Democratic senators claim not to have learned much from the recent confirmation hearings for (now) Chief Justice John Roberts. I, on the other hand, learned a lot by listening to those senators. An analysis of their rhetoric reveals trends in constitutional interpretation and evolution that are sure to influence the looming battle over the president's second Supreme Court nominee. Observation #1: Imitation is the Sincerest Form of Flattery Judicial activism” has long been a label conservatives use to describe liberal court decisions that seemingly elevate judges’ personal views above statutory and constitutional law. The Roberts hearings confirm that the term...
  • Now, It's the Roberts Court

    09/30/2005 1:59:46 PM PDT · by RWR8189 · 6 replies · 603+ views
    Christian Science Monitor ^ | September 30, 2005 | Warren Richey
    WASHINGTON – This much is known for sure: His favorite movie is "Doctor Zhivago." After that, surprisingly little is known about John Roberts, who is about to take up the reins of one of the most powerful institutions in American government as the 17th chief justice of the United States. Will he vote to overturn the abortion precedent Roe v. Wade? Some legal analysts say yes, others no.Will he favor states' power over Congress's efforts to pass federal laws under the Commerce Clause?Does he have a long-term strategy to move the court to the right, or will he gravitate to...
  • Poor Judgement (LA Times Editorial Gets it Right)

    09/30/2005 1:20:26 PM PDT · by RWR8189 · 14 replies · 1,267+ views
    Los Angeles Times ^ | September 30, 2005 | The Editors
    THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT 22 Democratic senators voted to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. as the 17th chief justice of the United States. That's more than anyone would have imagined just a few months ago, when the talk in Washington was all about filibusters and nuclear options. The bad news is that 22 Democratic senators voted against Roberts. That's far more than the handful of Republicans who voted against Bill Clinton's two Supreme Court appointees, Stephen G. Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Washington's recent polarization suggests things could have been worse. But it is still alarming that 22 Democrats...
  • Roberts Says He is Thankful for Prayers as he is Sworn in as Chief Justice

    09/29/2005 5:06:12 PM PDT · by Aussie Dasher · 50 replies · 1,377+ views
    LifeSiteNews.com ^ | 30 September 2005
    WASHINGTON, September 29, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) - John Roberts was sworn in as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court this afternoon after being approved in a 78-22 Senate vote this morning. All 55 Senate Republicans voted for Roberts and were joined by 22 Democrats and Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont). 22 Democrats voted "No," following the lead of Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada). Addressing the gathered guests for the swearing in ceremony, President George W. Bush stressed the importance of the event saying, "The nomination power is one of the most serious responsibilities of a President. When a President chooses a Supreme...
  • Who Voted How on the Roberts Confirmation and a Great Blast at Hillary (Best of the Web Today WSJ)

    09/29/2005 4:03:10 PM PDT · by MikeA · 24 replies · 1,729+ views
    Opinion Journal ^ | 9/29/05 | James Taranto
    Glug, Glug, Glug . . . Well, as usual, we guessed wrong. Two weeks ago we confidently predicted that Sen. Hillary Clinton would vote with the majority of the Democrats on the confirmation of Chief Justice John Roberts. The red-blue divide was clear. Democrats from states where George W. Bush beat John Kerry* favored Roberts 13-3, while Kerry-carry-staters opposed him 19-10. As for Mrs. Clinton, her vote shows her to be an extremist, to the left even of the Democratic Party. As New York's other senator might say, she has drifted far outside the mainstream and is headed for an...
  • How your senator voted on John Roberts

    09/29/2005 2:53:51 PM PDT · by Proud_USA_Republican · 111 replies · 2,944+ views
    MSNBC ^ | Sept 29, 2005 | msnbc
    Final count 78 - Yeas, 22 - Nays http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9503382/
  • LIVE THREAD: John Roberts Sworn in as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

    09/29/2005 11:57:54 AM PDT · by Howlin · 276 replies · 9,991+ views
    http://www.freerepublic.com ^ | September 29, 2005
    Live from the White House at 3:00 P.M. EDT!
  • LIVE THREAD - Senate Debate on John G. Roberts for Chief Justice (Confirmed by a vote of 78 - 22)

    09/29/2005 6:38:48 AM PDT · by katieanna · 579 replies · 19,807+ views
    CSpan ^ | Sept. 29, 2005
    Vote to occur at 11:30 Eastern Time today. Confirmation is expected.
  • For Roberts, Hubris And Heartstrings . . .

    09/27/2005 7:21:21 AM PDT · by kellynla · 14 replies · 836+ views
    The Washington Post ^ | September 27, 2005 | George F. Will
    Dianne Feinstein's thoughts on the nomination of John Roberts as chief justice of the United States should be read with a soulful violin solo playing, or perhaps accompanied by the theme song of "The Oprah Winfrey Show." Those thoughts are about pinning one's heart on one's sleeve, sharing one's feelings and letting one's inner Oprah come out for a stroll. Feinstein, like many Democrats, has interesting ideas about what Supreme Court justices do, or should do. In her statement explaining to fellow members of the Judiciary Committee why she opposes confirmation of Roberts, she began with a cascade of encomiums,...
  • Updated Vote Count for Judge John Roberts (9/27/05, 7:16 AM)

    09/27/2005 8:51:43 AM PDT · by Embraer2004 · 19 replies · 1,036+ views
    Kencamp.net ^ | 9/27/05 | Staff
    Updated Vote Count for Judge John Roberts Updated 7:16 am 9/27/05 From various MSM sources, and including the Judiciary Committee votes from September 22: Out of 44 Democratic Senators, here’s how our side plans to vote on the confirmation of Judge John Roberts. No Votes (17): Senator Harry Reid (NV) Senator Edward Kennedy (MA) Senator John Kerry (MA) Senator Jon Corzine (NJ) Senator Frank Lautenberg (NJ) Senator Barbara Boxer (CA) Senator Edward Kennedy (MA) Senator Joseph Biden (DE) Senator Dianne Feinstein (CA) Senator Chuck Schumer (NY) Senator Dick Durbin (IL) Senator Barack Obama (IL) Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (NY) Senator...
  • How Some Senators Plan to Vote on Roberts (At Least 17 Dems to Vote Yes; Assured 72 votes)

    09/27/2005 8:31:11 PM PDT · by RWR8189 · 17 replies · 746+ views
    Associated Press ^ | September 27, 2005
    All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote to confirm John Roberts as chief justice of the United States. The 44 Senate Democrats are less unified, and independent James Jeffords of Vermont has not announced his position. Democrats who have announced their support for Roberts (17):Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, Carl Levin...
  • Roberts Confirmation Heads to Senate Floor

    09/26/2005 6:32:47 AM PDT · by Jess Kitting · 24 replies · 624+ views
    Yahoo.com ^ | September 26, 2005 | Jesse Holland
    WASHINGTON - John Roberts' ascension to chief justice is so assured that senators debating the nomination this week may spend as much time talking about President Bush's upcoming nomination to fill a second vacancy on the Supreme Court. Two-thirds of the 100 senators — Republican and Democrats alike — had already announced their support of the conservative federal appeals court judge as the successor to the late William H. Rehnquist before the Senate even started its final debate Monday afternoon.
  • Roberts Heads Toward Easy Confirmation(Next...)

    09/26/2005 7:01:37 PM PDT · by kellynla · 24 replies · 666+ views
    WASHINGTON -- John Roberts, hailed by supporters as "the brightest of the bright," cruised Monday toward easy confirmation as chief justice while President Bush hinted that his next pick to the Supreme Court could be a minority or a woman. "Diversity is one of the strengths of the country," the president said. Roberts, a 50-year-old federal appellate judge and the president's first pick for the Supreme Court, is assured of getting an overwhelming confirmation vote by the Senate later this week, making him the nation's 17th chief justice. Roberts is "the brightest of the bright," declared Majority Leader Bill Frist,...
  • Roberts vote splits Democrats

    09/26/2005 6:14:53 PM PDT · by Aussie Dasher · 18 replies · 1,163+ views
    The Washington Times ^ | 27 September 2005 | Donald Lambro
    The Democrats' deepening division over the Supreme Court nomination of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. has angered many of their party's political allies on the left, some of whom warn that a vote for the conservative jurist will not soon be forgotten. No sooner had the nomination sailed through the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday -- with yes votes from three of the panel's Democrats -- than several of the most influential liberal groups were openly chastising them in a rare public display of intraparty infighting. "We are disappointed that the Roberts nomination has moved forward and saddened that some Democrats...
  • Roberts Wins Republican Praise in Senate

    09/26/2005 5:47:53 PM PDT · by Aussie Dasher · 3 replies · 416+ views
    FoxNews.com ^ | 27 September 2005
    WASHINGTON — John Roberts, hailed by supporters as "the brightest of the bright," cruised Monday toward easy confirmation as chief justice while President Bush hinted that his next pick to the Supreme Court could be a minority or a woman. "Diversity is one of the strengths of the country," the president said. Roberts, a 50-year-old federal appellate judge and the president's first pick for the Supreme Court, is assured of getting an overwhelming confirmation vote by the Senate later this week, making him the nation's 17th chief justice. Roberts is "the brightest of the bright," declared Majority Leader Bill Frist,...
  • How Some Senators Plan to Vote on Roberts (At Least 13 Dems Will Vote Yes)

    09/26/2005 4:28:02 PM PDT · by RWR8189 · 34 replies · 1,155+ views
    Associated Press ^ | September 26, 2005
    All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote to confirm John Roberts as chief justice of the United States. The 44 Senate Democrats are less unified, and independent James Jeffords of Vermont has not announced his position. Democrats who have announced their support for Roberts (13): Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bill Nelson of Florida, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Ken...
  • Dayton says he'll vote not to confirm Roberts (NO!?)

    09/24/2005 10:03:46 AM PDT · by ButThreeLeftsDo · 15 replies · 809+ views
    StarTribune ^ | 9/24/05 | Dane Smith
    U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton announced Friday that he would vote against confirming John Roberts as chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, but he predicted that the Senate will approve the appointment next week by a vote of about 70 to 30. At a State Capitol news conference, Dayton, a DFLer who is not seeking reelection in 2006, listed three reasons for his decision: •Roberts' refusal to answer even basic questions about his judicial philosophy and social views in Senate hearings. •The White House's refusal to release information on Roberts' record as a deputy solicitor general under President George H.W....
  • Leahy's vote for Roberts part of Democrats' strategy

    09/25/2005 7:54:26 AM PDT · by flixxx · 12 replies · 998+ views
    chicago sun times ^ | September 25, 2005 | Robert Novak
    The vote by Sen. Patrick Leahy, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, to confirm Judge John G. Roberts Jr. as chief justice surprised Bush administration officials. But it fit Democrats' Supreme Court grand strategy. Leahy is not really at odds with Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who came out against confirmation. Leahy opened the door for yes votes by Democratic senators (including two Judiciary Committee colleagues) who believe Roberts is going to be confirmed anyway. Reid's position puts the party formally in opposition to Roberts, satisfying People for the American Way and other anti- Roberts liberal activist groups.
  • Diversity Pool for High Court Justices Too Shallow?

    09/24/2005 4:31:12 AM PDT · by alessandrofiaschi · 32 replies · 1,054+ views
    Law.com ^ | 09-26-2005 | Marcia Coyle
    If President Bush wants to make a "diversity" pick for a Supreme Court nomination, must he swim shallow or deep in the pool of conservative minority and female possibilities? Conventional wisdom last week suggested that Bush, after tapping Judge John Roberts, a white male, for the position of chief justice, was unlikely to name another white male for the remaining high court vacancy, the seat currently held by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first female justice. Of course, conventional wisdom immediately after O'Connor announced her impending retirement held that Bush would maintain or increase diversity on the high court in...
  • Confirmation politics

    09/23/2005 10:29:22 PM PDT · by Crackingham · 15 replies · 595+ views
    Townhall ^ | 9/24//05 | Robert Novak
    The vote by Sen. Patrick Leahy, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, to confirm Judge John G. Roberts Jr. as chief justice surprised Bush administration officials. But it fit Democrats' Supreme Court grand strategy. Leahy is not really at odds with Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who came out against confirmation. Leahy opened the door for yes votes by Democratic senators (including two Judiciary Committee colleagues) who believe Roberts is going to be confirmed anyway. Reid's position puts the party formally in opposition to Roberts, satisfying People for the American Way and other anti-Roberts liberal activist groups. A footnote:...
  • WSJ: 18-0 (v. the 13-5 Senate Judiciary Committee vote for Judge Roberts)

    09/23/2005 6:07:58 AM PDT · by OESY · 10 replies · 874+ views
    Wall Street Journal ^ | September 23, 2005
    <p>That was the vote count when the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmed Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer in the 1990s, and it should have been the vote for John Roberts yesterday, instead of 13-5. The two Bill Clinton appointees are every bit as liberal as Judge Roberts is conservative, and they were just as unforthcoming during their confirmation hearings on how they would vote on specific cases.</p>
  • With next round ahead, Roberts vote presents dilemma for Senate Democrats

    09/23/2005 6:18:23 AM PDT · by YaYa123 · 8 replies · 655+ views
    Christian Science Monitor, via Yahoo ^ | September 23, 2005 | Gail Russell Chaddock,
    WASHINGTON - It's official. The long-anticipated Senate battle over the first vacancy on the US Supreme Court in 11 years has been downgraded to a skirmish, as both sides position for the next, more critical court fight. With three Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee voting to confirm John Roberts as chief justice Thursday, the last prospect for a party-line stand to block the nomination on the Senate floor next week expired.
  • Lindsey Graham Statement on Senate Judiciary Committee Vote on John Roberts Nomination

    09/23/2005 8:36:07 AM PDT · by YaYa123 · 56 replies · 1,740+ views
    Senator Graham's official website ^ | September 22, 2004 | Lindsey Graham
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One, I hope Senator Feingold has a long life and he sees many Supreme Court justices come and go. If I can do what my predecessor did, Senator Feingold, I have 50 more years to serve. (LAUGHTER) So this court will flip over four or five times. And I'm going to miss most of you all, by the way. (LAUGHTER) Senator Biden gave me some good advice when I first came to the Senate. He was gracious enough to come down and speak at Senator Thurmond's funeral upon his passing. And I really do like Senator...
  • Supreme choice . . .

    09/23/2005 11:48:48 AM PDT · by JZelle · 429+ views
    The Washington Times ^ | 9-23-05 | Edwin Meese III
    After 22 hours of testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Americans have seen a lot of chief justice nominee John Roberts. He was asked more than 500 questions -- some seemed more like speeches -- by 18 different senators about topics ranging from privacy law to court administration to his private life. By the end of the hearing, one thing was clear: John Roberts is a true conservative and a brilliant attorney whose service on the high court will be a lasting monument to President Bush. Consequently, the committee voted 13-5 yesterday to send his nomination as chief justice to...
  • Can someone give me a link to Feinstein's "talk to me as a man" demand of John Roberts?

    09/23/2005 4:09:47 PM PDT · by Mr. Buzzcut · 34 replies · 1,152+ views
    Me
    Thanks!
  • Hillary give Roberts the thumbs down.

    09/23/2005 7:23:15 AM PDT · by thebiggestdog · 15 replies · 427+ views
    www.hotchicken.com ^ | 8-23-05 | www.hotchicken.com
    No surprise here, Hillary Clinton released a statement confirming that she will vote no on John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. What I find interesting is her reasoning behind her no vote. According to a statement released by Hill, "I have an obligation to my constituents to make sure that I cast my vote for Chief Justice of the United States for someone I am convinced will be steadfast in protecting fundamental women's rights, civil rights, privacy rights, and who will respect the appropriate separation of powers among the three branches. After the Judiciary Hearings, I believe...
  • "The Roberts Vote" CARTOON featuring Hillary Clinton...

    09/23/2005 9:18:23 AM PDT · by IPWGOP · 36 replies · 2,978+ views
    IowaPresidentialWatch.com ^ | 9/23/2005 | IPWGOP
      (click here to see it reeeeeeeally large)
  • Roberts' presentation fails senator's abortion test

    09/22/2005 10:13:47 PM PDT · by Aussie Dasher · 10 replies · 823+ views
    The Washington Times ^ | 23 September 2005 | Charles Hurt
    In the end, it all came down to the issue of abortion for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who yesterday voted against federal Judge John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination to be chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. "I'm the only woman on this committee and when I started, I said that was going to be my bar," she told colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday. "And he didn't cross my bar." Mrs. Feinstein is usually among the first from her caucus to buck party loyalty and vote for a Republican nominee, but yesterday she refused even as...
  • Revelation in the eye of the storm (Wes Pruden!)

    09/22/2005 10:33:28 PM PDT · by smoothsailing · 16 replies · 1,001+ views
    The Washington Times ^ | 09-23-05 | Wesley Pruden
    Revelation in the eye of the storm By Wesley Pruden THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published September 23, 2005 Sometime in the 19th hour of the Senate grilling of John G. Roberts, one of the senators leaned over to whisper into the ear of a colleague: "If this were a prizefight, the referee would have to stop it."     None of his Democratic tormentors, in fact, had laid a glove on the president's nominee to be the chief justice of the United States. There was blood on the floor, but all of it shed by Democratic senators. There was no work for a...
  • Statement of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on the Nomination of Judge John G. Roberts

    09/23/2005 1:23:40 AM PDT · by yoe · 64 replies · 4,632+ views
    The Drudge Report ^ | September 22, 2005
    The nomination of Judge John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the United States is a matter of tremendous consequence for future generations of Americans. It requires thoughtful inquiry and debate, and I commend my colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee for their dedication to making sure that all questions were presented and that those outside of the Senate had the opportunity to make their voices heard. After serious and careful consideration of the Committee proceedings and Judge Roberts's writings, I believe I must vote against his confirmation. I do not believe that the Judge has presented his views with...
  • Among Democrats Activists, Little Indecision on Roberts: Who controls the Democratics?

    09/22/2005 7:11:22 AM PDT · by rface · 22 replies · 806+ views
    NYTimes ^ | September 22, 2005 | ROBIN TONER
    WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 - While many Democratic senators are still wrestling with their vote on Judge John G. Roberts Jr.'s nomination as chief justice of the United States, Democratic activists - in advocacy groups, policy organizations, the party apparatus - do not seem nearly as torn. [[ they are united in opposition!]]The opposition to the Roberts nomination in Democratic circles is vocal, widespread and not confined to the party's left; [[contrary to what Limbaugh claims!!]] Bruce Reed, the president of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, urged a no vote this week, even as Howard Dean, declared Roberts "the wrong man...
  • Roberts' ruling in Bush's favor debated- Terrorism case came as White House was interviewing him

    09/22/2005 7:43:45 AM PDT · by SmithL · 15 replies · 585+ views
    San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 9/22/5 | Bob Egelko
    There's no dispute that chief justice nominee John Roberts met with high-level White House officials while his appellate court was considering a case of enormous importance to the Bush administration, on the president's power to try battlefield captives and foreign terror suspects before military commissions. There is considerable dispute, among legal ethics experts as well as supporters and opponents of Roberts, about whether his contacts amounted to a conflict of interest that should have disqualified him from the case. "A reasonable person might question his impartiality when he sat on an appellate panel that directly and widely expanded the president's...
  • Roberts Nomination Sent to Full Senate

    09/22/2005 12:22:20 PM PDT · by kellynla · 25 replies · 1,028+ views
    Associated Press ^ | 9/22/2005 | JESSE J. HOLLAND
    The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved John Roberts' nomination as the next Supreme Court chief justice, virtually assuring his confirmation by the Senate next week. The official tally of 13-5 was anticlimatic, with the committee's 10 majority Republicans lined up solidly behind the conservative judge's nomination to the full Senate weeks in advance. But the decision by three Democrats to join Republican efforts to make Roberts the nation's 109th Supreme Court justice outlined the division in the minority caucus over whether Democrats can, or should, mount even symbolic opposition to Roberts to send President Bush a message on his...
  • Senate Panel's Debate on the Confirmation of Judge Roberts

    09/22/2005 6:55:16 PM PDT · by Aussie Dasher · 4 replies · 401+ views
    NY Times ^ | 23 September 2005
    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....
  • Senate Judiciary Supports John Roberts By 13 to 5 Vote

    09/22/2005 6:32:52 PM PDT · by Clintonfatigued · 36 replies · 713+ views
    Yahoo News ^ | September 22, 2005 | Thomas Ferraro
    The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday brushed aside concerns of divided Democrats and backed President George W. Bush's nomination of conservative John Roberts to be chief justice of the United States.
  • Roberts Vote (Live)

    09/22/2005 6:59:43 AM PDT · by 11th_VA · 134 replies · 3,709+ views
    Washington Post ^ | 22 Sept 2005
    Posted at 09:56 AM ET, 09/22/2005 Sen. Feinstein votes no. Vote Yes: Specter (R) No: Feinstein (D) Sen. Feinstein cast her vote no, saying she did not like Roberts answers to her questions and those of other senators, and particularly as "the only woman on the committee," remains unvconvinced that he will act as Chief Justice to uphold basic rights of all Americans. The committee has taken a break for a floor vote.
  • Editorials Across The Country Praise Judge John G. Roberts

    09/22/2005 6:21:31 PM PDT · by Aussie Dasher · 5 replies · 1,296+ views
    GOP.com ^ | 23 September 2005
    National Editorials: The Los Angeles Times: "It Will Be A Damning Indictment Of Petty Partisanship In Washington If An Overwhelming Majority Of The Senate Does Not Vote To Confirm John G. Roberts Jr. To Be The Next Chief Justice Of The United States." (Editorial, "Confirm Roberts," The Los Angeles Times, 9/20/05) The Los Angeles Times: "As Last Week's Confirmation Hearings Made Clear, Roberts Is An Exceptionally Qualified Nominee, Well Within The Mainstream Of American Legal Thought, Who Deserves Broad Bipartisan Support." (Editorial, "Confirm Roberts," The Los Angeles Times, 9/20/05) Chicago Tribune: "[R]oberts Richly Deserves To Be Confirmed: He Has The...
  • Schumer 'Reluctantly' Votes Against Roberts (FReep the poll on the right portion of the page)

    09/22/2005 5:54:31 PM PDT · by chet_in_ny · 19 replies · 1,053+ views
    1010 WINS AM NY ^ | 9/22/05 | 1010 WINS AM
    Sen. Charles Schumer on Thursday voted against Judge John Roberts' nomination as the Supreme Court's next chief justice, saying there was a ``reasonable danger'' he will turn out like conservative Justice Clarence Thomas. ``The risk that he might be a Thomas and the lack of any reassurance that he won't _ particularly in light of this president's professed desire to nominate people in that mold _ is just not good enough,'' said Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. ``I hope he is not a Thomas. But the risk is too great to bear,'' Schumer said. ``The court's...
  • What did I tell you?

    09/20/2005 1:09:28 PM PDT · by SirLinksalot · 50 replies · 1,527+ views
    Worldnetdaily.com ^ | 9/20/2005 | Joseph Farrah
    What did I tell you? © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com I predicted Aug. 8 that John Roberts would be confirmed by the U.S. Senate – getting all Republican votes and most Democrats. I reiterated this prediction Aug. 12 with the first real evidence of opposition to Roberts caving because he is not what they most fear about Republican appointees to the court. And now I can illustrate this unfolding trend by pointing out that the Washington Post formally endorsed confirmation of Roberts last Sunday. To quote the Post: John G. Roberts Jr. should be confirmed as chief justice of the United States....
  • Roberts nominated 13-5 vote

    09/22/2005 9:52:02 AM PDT · by edcoil · 186 replies · 9,742+ views
    C-span 3 | 21 Sept 2005 | EDCOIL
    I am watching a Cspan 3 of the vote. Hard to read the screen but it looks like a 12 to 5 vote for Roberts to be Chief Justice.
  • How Some Senators Plan to Vote on Roberts

    09/22/2005 3:38:33 PM PDT · by SmithL · 12 replies · 784+ views
    AP ^ | 9/22/5
    All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote for John Roberts' confirmation as Supreme Court chief justice next week. The 44 Democrats are less unified. Democrats who have announced their support for Roberts (8): Bill Nelson of Florida, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Max Baucus of Montana, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Kent Conrad of North Dakota. Democrats who voted for Roberts on the Judiciary Committee (3): Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin.
  • REPORT: Hillary Clinton announces she'll vote 'NO' on Roberts (Drudge Tease)

    09/22/2005 3:57:08 PM PDT · by RWR8189 · 69 replies · 2,350+ views
    Drudge Report ^ | September 22, 2005
    REPORT: Hillary Clinton announces she'll vote 'NO' on Roberts... Developing...
  • Puppet Politics: Reid "Got The Message" From Liberal Third Parties To Oppose Judge Roberts

    09/21/2005 7:39:58 PM PDT · by RWR8189 · 13 replies · 827+ views
    Republican National Committee ^ | September 21, 2005
    Reid Pushed By Liberal Groups In Opposing Judge Roberts: "The Senate Democratic Leader, Harry Reid Of Nevada, Said ... That He Would Oppose The Confirmation Of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. As Chief Justice, Surprising Both The White House And Fellow Democrats Still Conflicted About How To Vote." (Sheryl Gay Stolberg and David D. Kirkpatrick, "Top Democrat Says He'll Vote No On Roberts," The New York Times, 9/21/05) "'He Got The Message Loud And Clear, Didn't He?' Kim Gandy, President Of The National Organization For Women, Said Of Mr. Reid On Tuesday." (Sheryl Gay Stolberg and David D. Kirkpatrick, "Top...
  • The cagey nominee and the Constitution

    09/21/2005 7:17:31 PM PDT · by Lando Lincoln · 3 replies · 389+ views
    The Seattle Times ^ | 21 September 2005 | Bruce Ramsey
    In his calculated genuflections to Democrats in the Senate, Supreme Court nominee John Roberts left himself more wiggle room than it sometimes sounded. And it wasn't just on abortion. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., was interested in Brown v. Board of Education, the 1954 case that banned segregation in public schools. William Rehnquist, the late chief justice, had expressed his doubts about that case half a century ago. How about the new chief justice? Would he be sensitive, Kennedy asked, to minorities who were not asking for a handout, but a hand up? Certainly. Roberts expressed his sensitivity. He blessed the...
  • The Sound and the Fury: How John Roberts drove the Senate Democrats nuts.

    09/21/2005 5:59:48 PM PDT · by Crackingham · 11 replies · 1,090+ views
    Weekly Standard ^ | 09/21/2005 | Edward Morrissey
    Shakespeare had it right. Thanks to C-SPAN and the passions stoked from the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court, the American voters had a chance to see a range of idiocy from the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, all of it coming from the sound and fury of Democrats trying desperately to stay relevant. One by one, they strutted and fretted their hour upon the stage--how we wish it had only been an hour--and wound up signifying less than nothing. The minority party came into the hearing with a host of problems: President Bush had nominated a legal...
  • Roberts Picks Up Democratic Support

    09/21/2005 1:55:53 PM PDT · by NormsRevenge · 116 replies · 4,307+ views
    ap on Yahoo ^ | 9/21/05 | Jesse J. Holland - ap
    WASHINGTON - Chief Justice-nominee John Roberts, his confirmation secure, picked up support from fractured Senate Democrats Wednesday as President Bush met lawmakers to discuss a second, probably more contentious, vacancy on the Supreme Court. The Judiciary Committee's senior Democrat, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, announced his support for Roberts shortly after leaving the White House, guaranteeing bipartisan backing for the nominee in Thursday's vote by the panel. But Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, longtime liberal stalwart Edward Kennedy and former presidential candidate John Kerry all are opposing Roberts, underscoring a split in the Senate's 44 Democrats on whether they can or...
  • Confirm Roberts(The Left Angeles Times no less!)

    09/20/2005 6:18:43 AM PDT · by kellynla · 61 replies · 1,203+ views
    The Los Angeles Times(no less) ^ | September 20, 2005 | staff
    IT WILL BE A DAMNING INDICTMENT of petty partisanship in Washington if an overwhelming majority of the Senate does not vote to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. to be the next chief justice of the United States. As last week's confirmation hearings made clear, Roberts is an exceptionally qualified nominee, well within the mainstream of American legal thought, who deserves broad bipartisan support. If a majority of Democrats in the Senate vote against Roberts, they will reveal themselves as nothing more than self-defeating obstructionists. Most Democrats have not indicated how they will vote later this week in the Judiciary Committee,...
  • Pro-Choice Groups Fret Over John Roberts

    09/20/2005 1:54:23 PM PDT · by new yorker 77 · 6 replies · 365+ views
    The Washington Post via The Register-Guard ^ | September 17, 2005 | Charles Babington
    WASHINGTON - In 20 hours of Senate testimony this week, John Roberts made comments that would seem reassuring to abortion-rights advocates and unsettling to those seeking to outlaw abortion. There is a constitutional right to privacy, he said. And justices should show significant deference to long-settled cases such as the landmark 1973 Roe vs. Wade abortion ruling. But the reaction from both camps in the abortion wars was startling. Abortion rights groups took no comfort in the chief justice nominee's remarks, and anti-abortion groups took no offense. The reason, activists on the left and right say, is that both sides...
  • ABC: Harry Reid will vote against Roberts

    09/20/2005 11:05:25 AM PDT · by TChris · 249 replies · 7,600+ views
    (none) ^ | 9/20/2005 | ABC news - radio
    Just heard on ABC radio news: Harry Reid will soon announce that he will vote against Roberts' confirmation for SCOTUS.