Why John Roberts is a Frightening Choice for the Supreme Court

[Sandpiper]

The most frightening thing about John Roberts isn't his views on abortion, civil rights, etc. What's scary about him is his basic philosophy on the role of the judiciary.

John Roberts is Rehnquist clone, who believes that the Federal Judiciary should function as little more than a rubber stamping body for the legislature (when the right party is in charge of course).

Rehnquist propounded a philosophy that Judges should defer to the legislature/executive as long as Government's action had a "Rational Purpose/Basis." For those unfamiliar with the standards of scrutiny for constitutional law, "rational basis" is the absolute minimal standard that the Government has to satisfy.

A "rational purpose" can be found for damn near anything. Mr. Roberts used this standard as an appellate judge when he decided that the President had the power to strip citizens deemed "enemy combatants" of their guaranteed rights to counsel, due process, and habeas corpus. The "rational purpose" for this? Why national security of course.

In short, Roberts believes that any act by the Legislature or Executive even if per se unconstitutional, can be justified if a "rational purpose" exists for them. He sees the Bill of Rights not as fundamental or non-negotiable, but rather, something that can be brushed aside at the whim of the State.


Please call your Senators and tell them to oppose the nomination of John Roberts for Chief Justice.

[Atman]

1. I disagree.

The most scary part about Roberts is that George Bush nominated him.

Chertoff the clueless.

Brown the pony trader.

Gonzalez the torture boy.

The list goes on and on. History has demonstrated that when Bush appoints someone, it has nothing to do with merit or ability. It is only a payback for helping him get elected.

And look what a smashing job cronies do when appointed to important positions. It is simply unconscienable that this inexperienced BushCo shill gets an appointment to the highest court in the land.

The democrats should be blocking EVERY nominee of Bush's for ANYTHING. Bush has proved his inability to be an HR director for America.

[Sandpiper]

3. The difference with Roberts is

He gets a lifetime appointment. This tool of the far right will be doing damage for the next three decades.

[Hamlette]

2. no, that's not what Rehnquist's philosophy is about. . .

that is the GOP noise machine. Rehnquist, and perhaps Roberts, I don't know about him for sure, is judges uphold GOP talking points, laws, politicians, policy.

At least from a reading of Rehnquist's decisions. He could/would turn on a dime if the conservative philosophy changed.

[Sandpiper]

4. When the GOP is out of power, the Rehnquist philosophy becomes

Results oriented justice.

Decisions based on who the litigants are rather than the merits of the law.

Either way, the brand of "justice" they espouse is one of pure political partisanship and has nothing to do with "strict constructionism" or "original intent."