The Conservative a Liberal Can Love
The New Republic’s Jeffrey Rosen finds John Roberts an agreeable Supreme Court pick. Writing for The New York Times, Rosen says that
based on his record throughout his career, he does not appear to be a rigid Constitutional “originalist” in the tradition of Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. These men believe that the Constitution should be strictly interpreted in light of its original understanding; they are willing (to different degrees) to overturn years of Supreme Court precedents in the name of constitutional fidelity.
Having spent decades arguing before courts rather than sitting on them, John Roberts has never embraced one grand legal theory to the exclusion of all others. On the contrary, he has been trained to cast a wide net in order to reach a convincing result.
Read the whole thing.
I see Rosen is still going on about “The Constitution in Exile” thing.
While I don’t doubt there are some libertarians and a very few conservatives who would like to roll back the ‘New Deal’, that is so far from happening that it’s quite amusing to see Rosen taking it so seriously.
Roberts is CENTER/right. He showed that his IQ is right up there with Bill Clinton’s when he copied the “that depends on what the meaning of “is” is” to join the big government liberals in the “french fry” case. He used “intellectual” bamboozling to say that the 4th and 5th Amendments do not say what any 12 year old of average intelligence can see they do in fact clearly say.
Roberts is no conservative. But he is no liberal. He has come down on both sides of debate many times.
Because of his center position he will be and easy confirmation.
The “progressives” will make some noise and put up a show but they will not fight. They will keep their powder dry just in case a true conservative is the next nominee.
Even Dr. Frist should be able to get this middle of the road jurist approved by Oct.
The lefties are falling for it, heh heh heh…
O’Connor in drag. This will be worth it only if the White House is holding Janice Brown in reserve for the Chief slot.
It has me worried that he’s NOT an originalist on the Constitution. Brilliant orator or no, the last thing I want is someone whose mind is so open his brains fall out like O’Connor’s on many, many occasions and like the pretty much every other justices’s (excluding Thomas, Scalia, and usually Rehnquist) have. I hope he’s playing moderate with an eye towards moving right.
Frankly, he does sound rather like O’Connor, except perhaps with anti-abortion credentials. So, no progress for either side if he gets confirmed. Replacing Rehnquist with JRB (or a JRB think-alike) would be a real improvement…but Rehnquist isn’t retiring quite yet.
All Rosen has said is that Roberts has successfully argued his clients’ positions.
Duh. That’s called thinking like a lawyer and that’s what law schools train lawyers to do. It has little to nothing to do with what Robert actually believes.
Roberts is a smart lawyer but he is absolutely NOT CONSERVATIVE. He may not be as liberal as R.B. Ginsberg but he is nothing like Scalia or Thomas. Read his rulings. He is a big government jurist who thinks the American Constitution may be out of date.