 |
|
|
 News from Around the Americas | September 2005 
Roberts Avoids Specifics on Roe v. Wade
 Bill Mears - CNN
| | Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts glances around the Caucus Room of the Senate's Russell office building during his confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Photo: Charles Dharapak) |
Washington - At his Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday, Judge John Roberts deftly sidestepped the volatile issue of abortion but acknowledged legal precedence is "very important in promoting evenhandedness."
Wasting little time at the start of the hearing's second day, Sen. Arlen Specter, Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee, began by asking Roberts about his respect for the precedence of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.
Roberts declined to say whether he thought Roe was a proper ruling. "I should stay away from discussion of specific cases," he politely told Specter.
But he acknowledged that upholding past cases ensured "predictability, stability and legitimacy."
"There's nothing in my personal views based on faith or other sources that would prevent me from applying the precedent of the court faithfully," said Roberts, who is a Catholic.
The 50-year-old federal appeals court judge did not sidestep another abortion-related question.
He rejected views he expressed in a 1981 memo as a lawyer in the Reagan White House.
In the memo, he dismissed Roe v. Wade's holding that the right to abortion is grounded in what he termed "the so-called right to privacy."
"So they weren't necessarily your views then and they certainly aren't your views now?" Specter asked.
"I think that's fair, yes," Roberts replied.
Right to Privacy
Roberts told Specter that he believes the right to privacy exists in the Constitution.
"The right to privacy is protected under the Constitution in various ways," Roberts said, citing the First and Fourth amendments as well as 80 years of precedence.
Abortion was one of several topics expected to be addressed in a marathon session of questioning for the Supreme Court nominee.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the committee, pressed Roberts on presidential power in wartime, a timely issue with the White House exerting authority over suspects captured in the war on terror.
When asked if the president could authorize torture of prisoners, in violation of international treaties, Roberts said, "No one is above the law."
But he declined to go further in analyzing the issue.
Executive Power
He also seemed to reject executive power to order the detention of American citizens in wartime simply because of their nationality or religion, similar to the imprisonment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.
"I would be surprised if there were arguments that could support it" even in wartime, he replied.
Roberts described himself as a "modest judge," who "appreciates the role of a judge is limited. It is not to legislate or execute the law."
He added courts "should not have a dominant role" in society, except to block overreaching executive or legislative policy.
The early tone of the questioning was polite. Roberts maintained a steady, earnest stance, offering short answers on many issues.
When asked by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, if he supports Brown v. Board of Education, which outlawed segregation in public schools, Roberts replied, "Yes."
Other civil right laws, including the 1964 Voting Rights Act, he called "one of the most precious rights we have."
Kennedy Questions Memos
Kennedy sharply probed the judge over memos he wrote in the 1980s on whether federal anti-discrimination protections should be extended to universities' athletic, housing, faculty hiring and other programs not directly funded by the U.S. government. Kennedy said that the position in the memos would have sharply curtailed the civil rights protections of minorities if adopted.
Roberts bristled slightly, telling the lawmaker, "You've not accurately represented my position."
"I was not formulating policy. I was articulating and defending the [Reagan] administration's position," Roberts told Kennedy.
Even Democrats acknowledged it would be tough to rattle the nominee. Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Delaware, told Roberts that questioning him "is like pitching to Ken Griffey," the Cincinnati Reds star.
But Biden grew animated when he claimed Roberts was refusing to answer specifics, contrasting his responses with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's testimony during her 1993 confirmation.
"He's filibustering," Biden exclaimed.
"That's a bad word, Senator," replied Roberts, apparently in jest. When Specter protested over the line of questioning, Biden told the nominee, "Well, go ahead and not answer the question."
The second day of the confirmation hearing began Tuesday morning in the historic Senate Caucus Room, where the infamous he-said, she-said battle between Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill riveted the nation in 1991.
Roberts' nomination by President Bush to be the nation's 17th chief justice has yet to run into the same degree of partisan vitriol as that storied clash.
After listening to senators call him "brilliant" and "talented" during Monday's hearings, Roberts assured them he came to the hearing "with no agenda."
"I have no platform. Judges are not politicians who can promise to do certain things in exchange for votes," said Roberts, who also said he believes a "certain humility should characterize the judicial role."
Baseball Analogy
"Judges are like umpires. Umpires don't make the rules, they apply them," he said. "The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules. But it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire."
Roberts, a judge on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, originally was nominated to replace Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who announced her retirement in June. But the president then nominated him to succeed Chief Justice William Rehnquist after Rehnquist died this month.
Bush has not announced a new nominee for O'Connor's seat. He has indicated that decision won't come until after Roberts' confirmation process concludes.
Specter has said he wants to wrap up the hearings this week. Such a move would allow a vote by the full Senate in time for Roberts to join the Supreme Court before its next session begins October 3. |
| |
|
Vallarta Weddings
Tell a Friend
Site Map
Print this Page
Email Us