Ready? Cue the Sun...

This might be funny only to those who have listened to a bit of the confirmation hearings over the last couple days for Judge Roberts, but here it is anyway.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/15/op...brooks.html?hp

Quote:

---

John Roberts Jr. Aw, shucks. This has been a humbling experience, Mr. Chairman. To think that a boy from an exclusive prep school and Harvard Law could grow up and be nominated for the Supreme Court - it shows how in America it's possible to rise from privilege to power! That's the hallmark of our great nation.

So while, of course, I can't talk about specific cases, or any emotions, weather patterns or sandwich meats that may come before the Supreme Court at any time between now and my death in 2048, I do want to reiterate that I feel humbled by this experience. I feel humbled that my wife is dozing off behind me. I feel humbled by this committee's inability to lay a glove on me. And I feel modest. You see this suit? I skinny-dip in this suit. That's how modest I feel.

Tom Coburn Well put, Judge Roberts. Yet when I think of the polarization that still divides this great nation ... waaaahhhh ... waaaahhhh. (Senator Coburn breaks down weeping.)

Jeff Sessions This may be a good moment to remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that in this country unelected judges don't write the laws. We have unelected lobbyists to do that. Under our system, judges merely interpret the law and decide presidential elections.

Specter Senator Sessions, let me interrupt you right there. We're not here to argue among ourselves and ignore the nominee. We're here to deliver 30-minute speeches disguised as questions and ignore the nominee. So let me turn to Senator Bid - -

---

The New York Times isn't all bad ~;)

I like this part best

Quote:

---

Roberts Mr. Chairman, I certainly don't mean to draw attention to myself, for, as I have said, judges are like umpires - not home plate umpires, but those umpires stuck way out by the right-field foul pole. Nobody ever went to a game to watch the umpires.

But as you know, Judge Ginsburg, during her confirmation hearing, had herself wrapped in duct tape for fear that any involuntary reflex gestures she might make would mar her impartiality in deciding cases later on. Following her example, I have decided to spend the rest of these hearings in a soundproof booth, sunk in a tank of ravenous sharks and accompanied only by the illusionist David Copperfield. But before I go into isolation, I would like to mention the intense modesty I feel at this moment, notwithstanding the fact that not a single one of you slobs could have charged $700 an hour the way I did in private practice.

---

Oh, the satire.

It is not my country, but the more silly accusations are levelled against Roberts (such as his deliberately misunderstood joke about women becoming lawyers) the more I think he might make a decent Justice and (because of his 'diplomatic' skill) perhaps even a rather good Chief Justice.

Any American member actually thinks Roberts is Judge Dredd?

Quote:

---

Any American member actually thinks Roberts is Judge Dredd?

---

Isn't that a little harsh, I mean, be fair.

:balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanamori

Isn't that a little harsh, I mean, be fair.

:balloon2:

---

Eh?

:balloon:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

It is not my country, but the more silly accusations are levelled against Roberts (such as his deliberately misunderstood joke about women becoming lawyers) the more I think he might make a decent Justice and (because of his 'diplomatic' skill) perhaps even a rather good Chief Justice.

---

I'm curious if the Democrat senators are just throwing anything out there now, since Roberts is up to replace Rehnquist. Sort of testing the waters since the stakes aren't quite as big here. (They don't lose very much with this nomination)

Then when O'Connor's replacement comes up (representing the swing vote on the Court), I believe they will have a good idea of what sort of attacks will fly and which will be detrimental to their effort. That's when I expect a much more coherent and partisan attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanamori

:balloon:

---

:stunned:

Nevermind, sorry.

Well, Proletariat, in terms of strategery, this nomination is just as important as the next one. If a flaming liberal got Rehnquist's seat and a Nazi O'Connors, the result would be the same as if it were the other way around.

Except that Rehnquist's seat will automatically belong to the Chief Justice? Or am I wrong on that?

DA

Roberts is up for the Chief Justice's nomination. So there would be at least some difference, though I'm not sure how much more sway the chief justice has, only heard a little about his/her extra responsibilities. I think it includes writing the court's decision which could be important as legal matters often descend into the realm of semantics, or so it seems.

When he is in the majority decision, he decides who gets to write the majority, which is a huge advantage. Two people can agree on one end but how they reached that end decision can be hugely different. The one being written down will be the one setting precedence. He can also put appellate cases on a "no hear list", meaning that it won't come to the Supreme Court unless a majority of the other justices want to hear the case. Otherwise, there is the rule of four for hearing a case, although sometimes if they get three, a fourth will join just to get the case heard. I may be forgetting more, I should take notes in class :embarassed:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Del Arroyo

Well, Proletariat, in terms of strategery, this nomination is just as important as the next one. If a flaming liberal got Rehnquist's seat and a Nazi O'Connors, the result would be the same as if it were the other way around.

---

Kinda, but there seems to be some thought from the Democrat's side to letting this one go and then fighting tooth and nail for a liberal replacement for O'Connor. As if replacing the ideology of the Justice is part of the confirmation.

Just my 2p, anyhow.