What Selected Interest Groups are saying about John Roberts

[Skinner]

As we all evaluate Bush's nominee for Supreme Court, I thought it might be useful to find out what various interest groups were saying. Off the top of my head I selected the following groups and checked their websites. Here's what they're saying right now.

For now, I have only checked groups which are seen as being more progressive. It's probably worth checking what conservative groups are saying, but I have not done so. If there are any groups that you think should be added to this list, please post them in this thread.


GROUPS WITH SOME MENTION OF JOHN ROBERTS ON THEIR WEBSITES (Alphabetically)

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
http://www.aclu.org/court/court.cfm?ID=18795&c=316
"The American Civil Liberties Union today expressed deep concern about some of the civil liberties positions advocated by Judge John Roberts" ... "At a minimum, the Senate should determine the extent to which the positions taken in these briefs also reflect Roberts's personal views."

Democratic National Committee
http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/07/bush_chooses_to.php
"It is disappointing that when President Bush had the chance to bring the country together, he instead turned to a nominee who may have impressive legal credentials, but also has sharp partisan credentials that cannot be ignored."

Human Rights Campaign
http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=...
"JUDGE ROBERTS THREATENS TO TIP THE COURT TO FAR RIGHT" ... "With the Roberts nomination, the right to privacy and the future of a fair-minded Court are in grave danger. Judge Roberts has disputed the right to privacy laid out in Roe v. Wade, and urged that the case be overruled." ... "Judge Roberts has advocated for prayer in public schools and for weakening the wall between church and state." ... "We will be working closely with our coalition partners to ensure that Judge Roberts gets a thorough vetting."

Interfaith Alliance
http://www.interfaithalliance.org/site/apps/nl/content2...
"No one should rush to judgment on the nominee." ... "The Interfaith Alliance has not yet had a chance to review the record of Judge Roberts and we will not respond until we have done so."

League of Conservation Voters
http://www.lcv.org
"Environmental organizations will be closely reviewing his record as a judge, lawyer, and executive branch official. LCV urges the Senate to raise critical environmental issues during the confirmation process."

MoveOn
http://political.moveon.org/roberts
"Oppose John Roberts' Supreme Court Nomination" .. "the president has chosen a right wing corporate lawyer and ideologue for the nation's highest court instead of a judge who would protect the rights of the American people."

National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL)
http://www.naral.org
"Tell Your Senators to oppose anti-choice John Roberts!" ... "there is little doubt that he will work to overturn Roe v. Wade."

National Organization for Women
http://www.now.org/press/07-05/07-19.html
"NOW Vows to Fight Extremist Court Nominee" ... "Among our many concerns, Roberts actively opposes Roe v. Wade and wrote several amicus briefs while a Deputy Solicitor General. In one case where Roe was not even at issue, his brief offered gratuitously 'Roe was wrongly decided and should be overruled.'"

People for the American Way
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=19265
"John Roberts ... has a sparse public record; and several of his judicial opinions and argued cases raise real concerns about his suitability for the Supreme Court" ... "John Roberts’ record raises serious concerns and questions about where he stands on crucial legal and constitutional issues"

Sierra Club
http://www.sierraclub.org
"The Sierra Club and its coalition partners are reviewing the nominee's record on the environment."


GROUPS THAT DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING ABOUT JOHN ROBERTS ON THEIR WEBSITES YET (Alphabetically)

AFL-CIO
http://www.aflcio.org

American Association of Retired Persons (AARP)
http://www.aarp.org

Americans United for Separation of Church and State
http://www.au.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_nomin...

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
http://www.naacp.org

National Council of La Raza
http://www.nclr.org

[paineinthearse]

1. Who needs the corporate media? Where else can we get this synthesis!

Thank you.

[DoYouEverWonder]

5. Roberts was a member of Bush's Recount Team

in 2000. What exactly was his role in the recount is not known yet. But I do not think this sort of political activism is appropriate for a Supreme Court Justice.

Edit: (oops meant to respond to Skinner)

[nolabels]

30. Gee isn't that interesting

And oh'CONher was one of the five who stopped it. And don't all four come from a the system that is Texas politics?
At least they are not actors who pop up on the screen every so often

[Callboy]

32. so what. you cant change it. focus on

something that you can affect....

[DoYouEverWonder]

38. I think this should be the focus

Apparently he played a major roll and we know that questionable, if not illegal actions, were taken by the Bush Recount Team, such has the staged Miami Riot. I think it is very important that we find out his role in all this.

Plus any partisanship or wrong doing on Roberts part will be a lot easier to prove in this case rather then battling over abortion rights, which is the battle Bush wants us to fight.

[Swamp Rat]

2. Thank you

[ComerPerro]

3. Here's my Question. What did Roberts do for Bush?

Why is Bush paying him back with this nomination?

[Walt Starr]

7. Selection 2000

HE helped put Bush in office is what he did for him.

[racaulk]

8. Yes, it's payback...

I believe Roberts worked on Bush's legal team during the 2000 Florida fiasco, so Bush definitely has a huge debt to repay to him.

[Callboy]

27. nonsense. he doesnt need to repay

anyone. he s only doing what he is told...

[Callboy]

29. anyone for joining the Generic Party

its my platform..and its great.....i have a barcode for an icon.
The No Frills Party

[SammyWinstonJack]

36. bu$h** doesn't make an appointment that doesn't involve

payback. For that matter he doesn't make a policy decision that doesn't involve payback. bu$h** is ALL about payback. It's how he has managed to get this far in his miserable failure of a life and political career. Too think otherwise is delusional.

[seabeyond]

10. 2000 election theft n/t

[Callboy]

26. dont worry about it

its how the filty sys works why waste your breath on that issue

[Horse with no Name]

49. Why do you even bother?

I mean, if you don't care and all?

[Misunderestimator]

4. Another NARAL quote:

"By nominating John Roberts, George Bush has issued a slap in the face to every American who values personal privacy and a woman's right to choose."

Greast list!

[jmm]

6. He's slapping a bunch of faces

http://www.aclu.org/court/court.cfm?ID=18795&c=316

While serving as principal deputy solicitor general from 1989-1993, he authored briefs calling for Roe v. Wade to be overruled, supporting graduation prayer, and seeking to criminalize flag burning as a form of political protest.

[TahitiNut]

9. Please! Put this into Demopedia and let's keep it up-to-date!

We need to have a central reference point for this, if only because DUers (as human beings) seem to fly off in all directions until the data are well-known.

Nice work, Skinner!

[wicket]

11. great roundup, thanks!

[soup]

12. Concerned Women for America and Feminist Majority Foundation

Concerned Women for America

CWA: The President’s Supreme Choice 7/19/2005

Washington, D.C. -- President Bush has selected the Honorable John Roberts of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, to take the seat on the U.S. Supreme Court vacated by retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

“Everything we know about Judge Roberts tells us that he fulfills the President’s promise to nominate a judge who will strictly interpret the Constitution and not legislate from the bench,” said Jan LaRue, CWA’s chief counsel. “That’s why the President nominated him to the D.C. Circuit. He clerked for Rehnquist, which says a lot.”

No reasonable person can claim that Judge Roberts is “out-of-the-mainstream” or that his judicial philosophy or record constitutes “extraordinary circumstances” that would justify Democrats engaging in an abusive filibuster in order to deny him an up-or-down vote. The confirmation process should occur without partisan political rancor and be in keeping with the dignity of the Court. The past is the best evidence of future expectations. And there’s plenty of reasons to expect the Left to re-run plays from their judicial warfare book—distort-defame-delay. The problem for the left is that the American people are on to them and won’t stand for obstructionist, partisan politics.

-


Feminist Majority Foundation

Feminist Daily News Wire
July 19, 2005
BULLETIN: President Bush Nominates Right-Wing John Roberts to Supreme Court
President Bush nominated DC Circuit Court Judge John Roberts to the US Supreme Court. The Feminist Majority, the National Organization for Women, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and the National Abortion Federation all immediately announced their intentions to oppose Roberts for the position.

“I am extremely disappointed that the President did not appoint a centrist woman to fill Sandra Day O’Connor’s seat on the Supreme Court,” said Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority. “We are now going back to tokenism for women on the highest court in the land.”

“Everything we know about Judge Roberts’ record thus far indicates that he will be a solid vote against women’s rights and Roe v. Wade,” Smeal continued. “If he is to be confirmed by senators who support women’s rights, he must say where he stands on Roe and the right to privacy. The burden is on him.”

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. Good work Skinner. Thanks for the info.

I haven't got anything from Planned Parenthood yet but I'm pretty sure how they will come down.

[underpants]

14. Here we go

[Jacobin]

28. Not to worry!!

This guy will be defeated and the pretzledent will have no choice but to nominate you next.



Mr. Justice Underpants.....will not be denied his seat on the bench.

[soup]

15. Alliance for Justice and Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

Alliance for Justice


ROBERTS NOMINATION RAISES CONCERNS--NEEDS FULL REVIEW BY SENATE

07.19.2005, Washington, DC — Washington, DC-- “At this time, Alliance for Justice cannot support Judge Roberts’ elevation to the Supreme Court. While we will be conducting a complete analysis of his record on and off the bench, an initial review has led to serious concerns about whether he will be fair, independent and will protect the rights and freedoms of all Americans.

“As expressed in one case where he would have invalidated a provision of the Endangered Species Act, his exceedingly restrictive view of federal law-making authority – more restrictive than the current Supreme Court’s – could threaten a wide swath of workplace, civil rights, public safety and environmental protections. In his years of service as a political appointee in the administrations of Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush, Judge Roberts also helped craft legal policies that sought to weaken school desegregation efforts, the reproductive rights of women, environmental protections, church-state separation and the voting rights of African Americans.

-

Leadership Conference on Civil Rights

Roberts: Justice Scalia in O'Connor's Robes?
Senate Must Conduct Complete, Thorough and Probing Review

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 19, 2005


Washington - The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR), the nation's oldest, largest, and most diverse civil and human rights coalition has serious concerns with President Bush's nomination of Judge John Roberts to fill the Supreme Court chair of retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Wade Henderson, LCCR's executive director and the co-chair of the Coalition for a Fair and Independent Judiciary, an alliance of the country's leading national public interest organizations, issued the following statement:

"We are saddened that President Bush chose the politics of conflict and division over bipartisan consensus. While Judge Roberts may not have been on the Rev. James Dobson's short list of pre-approved nominees, let's be clear - John Roberts is no mainstream judge.

"At first blush, John Roberts may not appear to be an ultra right judicial activist, but his approach to issues of protecting the rights and freedoms of individual Americans are, at best, unclear and, in some instances, deeply troubling.

[Zomby Woof]

16. ZombyKick

[Rainbowreflect]

17. Great info! It is nice to have it all together to review. Thanks!

[soup]

18. National Partnership for Women & Families

National Partnership for Women & Families

For Immediate Release

Women’s Leader Has Serious Concern About John Roberts, Jr.,
Urges Senate to Closely Examine His Record, Rulings
Statement of Debra L. Ness, President
National Partnership for Women & Families

“President Bush’s nomination of John Roberts Jr. to serve on the United States Supreme Court raises grave concerns for women and families across this country. Senators now have a constitutional obligation to closely examine Judge Roberts’ record, views and opinions – and to reject him if they are not fully convinced that he will safeguard our civil rights and liberties and continue the progress toward equality for all Americans.

What we know of Judge Roberts’ record is deeply troubling. He has argued that Roe v. Wade should be overturned and that Congressional authority should be limited. We need to know whether Judge Roberts will uphold our right to privacy. We need to know where he stands on Congress’ ability to legislate on key issues. We need to know if he has a demonstrated commitment to equal justice under the law, and a record of applying and adhering to the law in a fair and unbiased manner.

on edit: dupe - sorry

[trogdor]

19. Kicked and Recommended.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

20. Thanks Skinner

[DemExpat]

21. Excellent.

DemEx

[abluelady]

22. I Thought We were Going to Stay Focused on Rove

We are all falling into Bush's distraction plan if we keep talking about Roberts. Why not wait a few weeks since the Senate won't be confirming him for a while? there will be plenty of time to talk about Roberts--let's face it Bush will never appoint someone we like, but if we let Rove get out of the papers......

[Lars39]

35. We can multi-task.

[Up2Late]

23. As NARAL says , and I also want to stress, Roberts is ANTI-CHOICE!

NOT Pro-life!

I hope we are ALL using this truthful term here, by now. I think the term "Anti-Choice" actually started here at DU.

Their is NOTHING pro-life about the positions of the groups or the people that claim to be Pro-life. Most of them are Pro-War and Pro-Poverty.

[Callboy]

24. and suddenly nobody wants to discuse rove

that is why this party has a prob. everyone has DNC ADD. get refocused back on the leakgate issue, people

[Callboy]

25. anybody notice coulter bashing the pick?

she is trying some reverse psych on us all, methinks. get peeps to start thinking he is a bad pick for them, thus good for DNC. It will probably work....

[Zomby Woof]

31. Maybe it's because...

He isn't far enough to the right for her...

[ibegurpard]

41. No

She got the call...make him look bad so he appears to be a middle-of-the-road choice.

[Zomby Woof]

52. Sounds logical to me

In a way, both theories are sound.

[jmowreader]

51. Mussolini wasn't far enough to the right for Ann Coulter

So why would Roberts be?

[JRob]

33. great compilation

[Rainscents]

34. Thanks for great list and links!!

[Behind the Aegis]

37. One more

The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
"The Task Force calls President Bush's selection of Judge John Roberts Jr. as his Supreme Court nominee a reason for 'great pause'"
http://www.thetaskforce.org/media/release.cfm?releaseID...

[ibegurpard]

39. Be ready to oppose

but keep it low profile for now.
That's exactly what they want...for all of us to raise a huge stink right now. It will play perfectly into the "bad cop" routine that Ann Coulter and her ilk are already orchestrating. Keep it muted and then when the hearings start it doesn't look like you hated him out of the starting gate.

[indydba]

40. Our Humble Thanks

We, here in the red states, and GOP, would like to take this opportunity to thank all you bloggers, posters, and reader. In our dark, smoke-filled back room, we all decided together that by nominating a clandestine candidate such as John Roberts, you all would move off the whole Karl Rove fiasco, and let us get back to the matters at hand: making money and laughing at your civil rights.

Ha-Ha-Ha...

[Horse with no Name]

50. Enjoy your stay

[The Magistrate]

42. The Best Angle By Far For Opposition, Comrades

Is this reptile's participation in the Florida recount fight that procured suvvess for the '00 Coup.


Queries on this subject by Democratic Senators would receive coverage, and in the current atmosphere of scandal and distrust could do much to renew interest in the fact of the '00 Coup, and undermine the popular perception of legitimacy about the regime installed by it.

It could also establish the wretch as a politicized figure unfit for the High Court on grounds of partisanship, particulatly as there will certainly be cases invoolving war crimes, torture and the like committed by his cronies reaching the High Court during his potential service there, on which he could not possibly be trusted to rule fairly and in accordance with the law and the Constitution, in light of his obvious partisanship.

"The whole art of war consists in a reasoned and extremely circumspect defensive, followed by audacious attack."

[ibegurpard]

44. Excellent idea.

eom

[Lone_Star_Dem]

47. That would be a nice perk from this.

This could help to further destabilize this administration.

I like this strategy.

[EFerrari]

55. And right you are, Sir.

That issue still strikes to the core. As it should.

[jonnyblitz]

43. thanks for this, skinner.

[Deb]

45. Americans United for Separation has responded

Senate Should Reject Confirmation Of John G. Roberts To Supreme Court, Says Americans United
Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Watchdog Group Cites Nominee's Effort To Overturn Decades Of Church-State Safeguards

Bush administration nominee John G. Roberts is unsuited for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court and the Senate should refuse to confirm him, says Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

“John Roberts has long been a faithful soldier in the right wing’s war on the Bill of Rights,” said Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “He does not support personal liberties and should not receive a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.”

http://www.au.org/site/News2?abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&i...

[indigo32]

46. Awesome Skinner

thank you very much

[bejammin075]

48. N.O.W.'s comment the most useful at this time

It looks like the pro-life croud is the most ready to go ballistic on the nominee. It's a place to start, and when the other groups learn more, we will continue to hammer and make our points. I think we should basically fight like hell, and also keep fighting with the Rove story, and keep relating it to how Bush lied us into war.

[EFerrari]

53. We need a DU action here, Skinner.

To let our reps know we're concerned and we're watching.

As simple as a list of questions such as, "Are you aware of the role Judge Roberts played in the resolution of the 2000 Presidential Election?

And asking for their thoughts.

[Horse with no Name]

54. You forgot Planned Parenthood (they marched on DC today)

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/porta... ;jsessionid=4BC9FAD9C3FA6EC62EAE79A2369CD356
President Bush's nomination last night of Judge John G. Roberts to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court raises serious questions and grave concerns about women's health and safety. This morning, Planned Parenthood staff and supporters, including the "Roe Rangers," gathered at the court to demonstrate that concern.

Because Roberts has gone on record calling for Roe v. Wade to be overturned, it is imperative that the Senate conduct a thorough and independent review before approving a lifetime appointment to the nation's highest court. Roberts must affirm his commitment to constitutional protections for women's health and reproductive rights.




Just for kicks...putting their mission statement here and wishing it belonged to our country:
Planned Parenthood affiliate health centers provide culturally competent, high quality, affordable health care to millions of diverse women, men, and teens every year. Planned Parenthood welcomes everyone — regardless of race, age, disability, sexual orientation, or income.

[fberknm]

56. We must win in 2006 and again in 2008

We should not be surprised to see who W nominated. Also, in terms of age, he could be there for 30 years.

It is unreasonable to ask a conservative republican to nominate a liberal, a moderate or a centrist, just as it is unreasonable to ask a democrat to nominate a conservative, or even a centrist.

This is absolutely why 2006, and even moreso, 2008 are so important. First, 2006 to get a few more votes to be able to restrain how far to the right W can go if another justice resigns. We then have to look to 2008 to elect someone who will support and nominate court candidates who will appropriately interpret the constitution as a living document, not a static piece of paper.

FWH

[Maddy McCall]

57. ==

[femrap]

58. The Family Research Council

and leader, Tony Perkins, is jumping for joy over Roberts....

and probably Feminists for Life (considering Mrs. Roberts is a member of that group) is happy, too.

Doesn't anyone else think 'feminists for life' is an oxymoron....like Blacks for Slavery or Jews for Nazis?

[muchacho]

59. Americans United for Separation of Church and State

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has a Roberts story now.

Go Barry Lynn!

[EFerrari]

60. kick