Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

LATIMES Editorial) A judicious choice

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:50 AM
Original message
LATIMES Editorial) A judicious choice

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-su...

EDITORIALS
A judicious choice

July 20, 2005

By all accounts, John G. Roberts Jr. is a likable guy. His list of friends and supporters, brandished by President Bush on Tuesday as he announced Roberts as his nominee for the Supreme Court, stands at 156 and counting, spanning the ideological spectrum, with a litany of adjectives that would make any mother (or president for that matter) proud.

Whether Roberts is the right choice for the court is another question. Although some liberal interest groups rushed to portray Roberts as a dangerous extremist, his nomination seems to signal a desire on the part of the White House to avoid a nasty confirmation battle. Given that Bush passed over some of the more extreme conservatives who'd been mentioned as candidates, we may yet witness a civil debate about the Supreme Court, and the president will deserve some credit if we do. In any event, Bush was right Tuesday to insist that the Senate act on his nomination before the court reconvenes in October.

Roberts is a shrewd choice for many reasons, but perhaps his most important characteristic is a near-ideal mixture of familiarity and inscrutability. He has a sterling record in Washington as a litigator, appearing before the Supreme Court 39 times over more than a decade, and few he has encountered have anything bad to say about him; even legal adversaries such as Walter Dellinger, a solicitor general in the Clinton administration, praise him.

At the same time, his relatively sparse judicial record he has only been on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit since June 2003 makes it difficult for opponents to build a case against him. <snip>

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. This statement cuts both ways:
At the same time, his relatively sparse judicial record he has only been on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit since June 2003 makes it difficult for opponents to build a case against him.

Being against him, his 'relatively sparse' judicial record tells me he doesn't have enough experience to be part of SCOTUS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 22nd 2014, 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC