John Roberts, Strong Conservative, to Replace O’Connor?ABC and Fox news have reported that Bush has offered the positionto the Supreme Court to Roberts. The New York Times reports Bush offered the job via a telephone call at 12:35 p.m. "after a luncheon with the visiting prime minister of Australia, John Howard."
New York Times seems to be worried:
Advocacy groups on the right say that Roberts, a 50-year-old native of Buffalo, N.Y., who attended Harvard Law School, is a bright judge with strong conservative credentials he burnished in the administrations of former Presidents Bush and Reagan. While he has been a federal judge for just a little more than two years, legal experts say that whatever experience he lacks on the bench is offset by his many years arguing cases before the Supreme Court.
Liberal groups, however, say Roberts has taken positions in cases involving free speech and religious liberty that endanger those rights. Abortion rights groups allege that Roberts is hostile to women's reproductive freedom and cite a brief he co-wrote in 1990 that suggested the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 high court decision that legalized abortion.
"The court's conclusion in Roe that there is a fundamental right to an abortion ... finds no support in the text, structure or history of the Constitution," the brief said.
In his defense, Roberts told senators during his 2003 confirmation hearing that he would be guided by legal precedent. "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land. ... There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."
Frankly, I am troubled by this last statement by Roberts. The Constitution should be the highest and only guiding presedent used in making decisions. It would be my hope that Roberts will adhere to the original intent of the Constitution when making decisions, and start the process of cleaning up the junk-precedents the court has been establishing over years of legislating from the bench.
WorldMagBlog thinks the timing has to do with limiting the Democrats ability to sway public opinion. Commitee for Justice afirms this.
"If Ted Kennedy is not anywhere near a microphone when the nominee is announced, that is an advantage," said Sean Rushton, Director of the Committee for Justice.
Political Teen has a round up of Blogs on the issue:
The Supreme Court nomination is today’s blog topic:
Wizbang - First SCOTUS nomination in the blogosphere
Redstate - Started rumor that the pick would be today
SCT Nomination - Information on Edith
Blogs for Bush - Asks for your reactions on the choice tonight
Think Progress - Supreme Court pick is changing the “Rove” subject.
RedState.org has provided two helpfull links on Roberts:
Well, this is all good, but there hasn't been an announcement yet. We'll see.