Today on Blogcritics
Home » Roberts In, Rehnquist Gone, O’Connor Out, Alito In?: Blogcritics on the Changing Supreme Court

Roberts In, Rehnquist Gone, O’Connor Out, Alito In?: Blogcritics on the Changing Supreme Court

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

When it rains it pours: William H. Rehnquist, the nation’s 16th chief justice’s casket was carried up the steps of the Supreme Court today by former clerks, poetically including John Roberts, the man President Bush nominated to succeed him.

With the impending retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, Bush will have a second Court seat to fill. As would be expected, controversy rages in all directions on Roberts, the direction of the Court, and Bush’s judicial legacy.

Ongoing news and commentary:

SCOTUS will deal with cases BESIDES Roe v. Wade
Disclosure 1: I am a male who will never have or perform an abortion. Disclosure 2: I support abortion rights. Disclosure 3: I did NOT support the Supreme Court’s recent Kelo v. New London decision, which was a setback for the very…
Posted to Politics by Michael J. West on November 15, 2005 10:10 AM

Sound and Fury
Do the Democrats fight it out over Alito, or just pretend to fight? Do they go all out and filibuster the nomination, or do they put on a serious face and hold an inquisition on the Judiciary Committee to…
Posted to Politics by Drew McKissick on November 8, 2005 11:31 PM

Alito should be rejected BECAUSE he will literally interpret our Constitution
Should you support Judge Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court? Your answer should turn on one question: How much do you respect the U.S. Constitution? If you answer “a lot”, then, Conservative or Liberal, Alito is your man….
Posted to Politics by Mike Valdman on November 8, 2005 07:00 PM

Republicans Claim They Don’t Want Justices Who “Legislate From The Bench.” Then Why Support Alito?
One frequent Republican talking point is that the party favors judges who won’t “legislate from the bench.” The phrasing came up again last week, when President Bush nominated 3rd Circuit Appeals Court Judge Samuel Alito to fill the Supreme Court seat…
Posted to Politics by David R. Mark on November 8, 2005 10:01 AM

Focus, Focus, Focus
Being a bit of a pessimistic centrist, I see this whole Libby, Plame, Cheney, CIA, blah blah blah scandal getting buried soon. Why? Because of Supreme Court nominee Alito. All the hubbub lately about Democrats using filibuster to try and…
Posted to Politics by Preston Parkhurst on November 3, 2005 06:32 PM

The Battle We Needed
With President Bush’s nomination of Samuel Alito, Republicans have received exactly what they wanted – a solid conservative – and exactly what they needed – a fight that will re-galvanize the conservative base. There should be absolutely no doubt…
Posted to Politics by Drew McKissick on November 3, 2005 03:13 PM

In The Middle: Supreme Court Nominee Samuel Alito, Jr
From: Phillip Winn @ Center-Right To: Eric Berlin @ Center-Left Subject: Supreme Court Nominee Samuel Alito, Jr While it is still unclear how Harriet Miers would have turned out as a Supreme Court Justice, her withdrawal last week gave President Bush…
Posted to Politics by Phillip Winn on November 3, 2005 11:42 AM

Alito: Right Wing Ideologue?
Despite initial intentions not to write too much about Samuel Alito I find myself resolved to tackle a couple of issues in relation to him this morning. They mostly arise from conversations I’ve had elsewhere where people are amazed…
Posted to Politics by Fiona de Londras on November 2, 2005 04:08 PM

Alito Is Not An Extremist, Activist Judge!
Of course Alito is not an extremist, activist judge, but only if you ignore… His position against the Family Leave Act. His position that anti-gay hate speech is okay in schools. His position against the upholding of the legality of…
Posted to Politics by Trish Wilson on November 1, 2005 12:50 PM

Here Comes “Scalito”
Fear and loathing in DC: Bush picks a demonstrably hard-right nominee for the Supreme Court.
Posted to Politics by Natalie Davis on October 31, 2005 09:19 AM

Alito Anti-Gay?
Bush-nominated candidate for the Supreme Court, Samuel A. Alito, Jr. apparently agrees that Christian students should be able to speak out against homosexuality, at least in State College, PA. In an opinion filed February 14, 2001 with the US Court of…
Posted to Politics by Neal Gardner on October 31, 2005 08:27 AM

Review: Radicals in Robes
Conservatives skewered the Harriet Miers nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court because they feared they lacked knowledge of her positions on various issues important to them. Although predating the Miers nomination, Cass R. Sunstein’s Radicals in Robes attempts to…
Posted to Books by Tim Gebhart on October 28, 2005 04:25 PM

Ozzie Goes Through Withdrawal with Harriet
Miers failed to anticipate that her candidacy might cause her to be pressured to expose her work as White House counsel.
Posted to Politics by Chancelucky on October 28, 2005 08:43 AM

Supreme Court: Who’s Next?
Perhaps it’s just dumb luck that has set him up with this historic opportunity.
Posted to Politics by Al Barger on October 28, 2005 03:59 AM

Miers Withdraws Supreme Court Nomination
Miers is one of only a handful of nominees in the history of the court to resign.
Posted to Politics by David R. Mark on October 27, 2005 09:34 AM

ANTIDOTE TO FRIST, MIERS AND REED
It’s hard to keep up with all the corruption. The Senate majority leader’s, for instance: Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) was given considerable information about his stake in his family’s hospital company, according to records that are…
Posted to Straight Up by Jan Herman on October 25, 2005 09:47 AM

Harriet E. Miers and Blood in the Water
It’s as if we’re trying to appoint Judge Judy to the Supreme Court. The difference, of course…
Posted to Politics by Al Barger on October 24, 2005 02:21 AM

What Miers should say
Gonzales v Oregon is the Supreme Court latest attempt to deal with a contentious social issue.
Posted to Politics by Tom Donelson on October 22, 2005 01:48 AM

White House Releases Harriet Miers SP1
The forecasts for a continued boom/bubble in the age of Bush 2.0 came to a halt recently…
Posted to Politics by Warner Crocker on October 19, 2005 02:28 PM

Scenes We’d Like To See
Scene 1: White House Press Corps Gives Scott McClellan an Atomic Wedgie DAVID GREGORY: Scott aren’t you contradicting what you told us five minutes ago? McCLELLAN: I didn’t tell you anything five minutes ago, I was just clearing my throat… DAVID GREGORY: OK…
Posted to Politics by The Fifth Dentist on October 18, 2005 02:44 PM

The Miers Strategy
The nomination of a relatively unknown Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court has generated a lot of emotion in conservative circles. Many people wonder why Bush, who promised to nominate judges in the mold of Scalia and Thomas, is…
Posted to Politics by John Bambenek on October 18, 2005 12:45 PM

Santorum, In Latest Move To Distance Himself From Bush, Criticizes “Trust Me” Defense of Miers
Americans “deserve better” than President Bush’s “trust me” approach to the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers, Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) said Friday on a Philadelphia radio show. “It is what I term the president’s second faith-based initiative, which is `trust…
Posted to Politics by David R. Mark on October 16, 2005 10:17 AM (Relevance: 4)

Harriet Miers: Policy or Principle?
The word in all the media is that the conservatives are upset, and the Democrats are pleased, but it seems to me that there are varied motivations for both the pleasure and displeasure. David Frum quotes a man who…
Posted to Politics by Sam Jack on October 15, 2005 05:40 PM (Relevance: 12)

Quag-Miers
I guess the President has really stepped in it this time. This time, fellow conservatives are the ones who are unhappy. As the old saying goes, “with friends like these, who needs anemone’s?” Over the past few weeks, as…
Posted to Politics by David Flanagan on October 14, 2005 10:25 AM

In Which Harriet Miers Disrupts My Sleep
I had a dream about Harriet Miers the other night. (Yes, yes, I know: Cooper, get a life.) The dream — not my narrative unconscious at its most exciting, I’m afraid — involved George Bush withdrawing her…
Posted to Politics by Douglas Anthony Cooper on October 14, 2005 01:47 AM

In the Middle: Harriet Miers
Should Harriet Miers be confirmed as Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court? Two sides dig in…
Posted to Politics by Eric Berlin on October 12, 2005 06:08 PM

Dobson Backtracks, Says “Confidential Conversations” With Rove Not “Incendiary”
What is an “assurance”? The Senate Judiciary Committee may still ask, in spite of Dobson’s spin today.
Posted to Politics by David R. Mark on October 12, 2005 10:53 AM

Death With Dignity: John Roberts Legislating From The Bench
One conservative contradiction is that they claim to favor judges who don’t “legislate from the bench”, who obey the “will of the voters”, and who aren’t “judicial activists”. They also claim to favor limited federal government, respect for the plain…
Posted to Politics by Balletshooz on October 11, 2005 04:34 PM

Bush Defends Choice of Harriet Miers
At a press conference, the President defends choosing Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court: (My words, pictures by Bazooka Joe) Ed/Pub:NB Moved to…
Posted to Politics by The Fifth Dentist on October 10, 2005 09:33 AM

Will Rove’s “Confidential Conversations” With Dobson Scuttle Miers’ Chances?
Alleged conversations between Senior White House Advisor Karl Rove and Christian Conservative James Dobson may wind up costing Harriet Miers a seat on the Supreme Court. Ironic, isn’t it? Rove was trying to help President Bush by landing a key endorsement…
Posted to Politics by David R. Mark on October 9, 2005 09:27 PM

Why Is The Right Opposed To Harriet Miers?
In Bush’s five years as president he hasn’t received any serious opposition from his own party. Sure, there’s been occasional grumbling even from his base, but his nomination of Harriet Miers marks the first time that conservative criticism has…
Posted to Politics by Mike Valdman on October 10, 2005 07:29 PM

Sekulow for the Supreme Court
Like many conservatives, I was stunned by President Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. The only plausible point in Bush’s favor is that he believes Miers to be a reliable conservative who can be confirmed with a…
Posted to Politics by Ashley Tate on October 9, 2005 08:40 AM

Review: Active Liberty by Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer
Active Liberty, by Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, is a first pass at a progressive interpretation of the Constitution. at least I hope it’s a first pass. I like the book, but truth is I wanted to like it more…
Posted to Books by Prometheus 6 on October 8, 2005 10:30 PM

Some Are Concerned That Main Selling Point For Miers Is Her Faith
Was Harriet Miers nominated for the Supreme Court because of her evangelical Christian faith? That’s the message a lot of people — conservatives and liberals alike — are hearing from the Bush Administration and its allies, as the campaign to sell…
Posted to Politics by David R. Mark on October 7, 2005 12:03 PM

The Miers Nomination
Thousands of years ago the Chinese general Sun Tzu said that the battle that is won before it begins is something the common man cannot comprehend. Each day it appears more and more likely that this is true of…
Posted to Politics by Drew McKissick on October 6, 2005 01:29 PM

Conservatives Leading The Charge Against Miers
President Bush has sought to counter a tidal wave of accusations — not from his Democratic opponents but from his own core political supporters — that Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers is a crony who lacks the experience, intellect and…
Posted to Politics by David R. Mark on October 6, 2005 10:09 AM

Bush Press Conference – Left Behind
As usual, I felt left out of George W. Bush’s America this morning. Tuning in to his press conference (the first in four long months), I heard him kowtowing to Conservatives. It was all ” don’t worry –
Posted to Politics by Jude Nagurney Camwell on October 4, 2005 01:03 PM

What You Don’t Know About The Miers Nomination
It’s all a plot you know. The Miers nomination, I mean. It’s in the VRWC (Vast Right Wing Conspiracy) Handbook. Chapter 3 (“Stocking Federal Courts With Ultra Right-Wingers), Section C, paragraph 5, sentence 4 to be exact! The President…
Posted to Politics by David Flanagan on October 4, 2005 09:57 AM

Harriet, Could You Please Come In Here …
THE PRESIDENT: Karl, I’ve decided to appoint Brownie to the open seat on the Supreme Court. He did a heck of a job in New Orleans. You know I used to go there and get shit faced when…
Posted to Politics by The Fifth Dentist on October 4, 2005 08:36 AM

Bush Loves Miers’s Homestyle Cookin’
Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court is disappointing. Miers has no judicial experience. Her qualifications are as head of the Texas State Lottery Commission and President of the Texas State Bar Association. No experience…
Posted to Politics by Sam Jack on October 4, 2005 01:24 AM

Miers Nomination: This Ain’t the Freakin’ Dalai Lama
Our esteemed leader, George W. Bush, has nominated his former staff secretary and current White House Counsel Harriet Miers to be the next Supreme Court justice. (In related news, Bush has nominated his cat Willie to be Deputy Secretary…
Posted to Politics by Blunderford on October 3, 2005 05:59 PM

Harriet Miers: Good Joke or Bad Joke?
That Harriet Miers is a joke, we have no reason to doubt. David Frum reports that Miers “once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met.” David — whatever you may…
Posted to Politics by Douglas Anthony Cooper on October 3, 2005 05:35 PM

Miers and O’Connor Confirmations: A Re-Run?
With the nation divided into red and blue states, and both sides peering out from their political bunkers at the spectacle of more power lobbying and a potential filibuster over Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, it’s worth a look back…
Posted to Politics by Bryce Zabel on October 3, 2005 05:00 PM

Harriet Miers and the early bird
Just saw the first ad for Harriet Miers, President Bush’s new nominee for the US Supreme Court. Within a couple of hours of the announcement, I found an ad up at the Reason magazine website for JusticeMiers.com, “a…
Posted to Politics by Al Barger on October 3, 2005 02:44 PM

Bush Nominates a “Pit Bull” to the Supreme Court
The appointment of White House Counsel Harriet Miers will undoubtedly raise eyebrows.
Posted to Politics by Bill Wallo on October 3, 2005 10:17 AM

JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT
“A pitbull in size 6 shoes” — that’s what the Bullshitter-in-Chief has called Harriet Miers, right, the trusted adviser…
Posted to Straight Up by Jan Herman on October 3, 2005 09:47 AM

Bush Nominates Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court
This morning President Bush nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers, who has never served as a judge, to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court. If confirmed by the Senate, Miers would join Justice …
Posted to Politics by Eric Olsen on October 3, 2005 08:56 AM

No Surprise Roberts Confirmed
Well, it came as no surprise that Judge John Roberts Jr. was easily confirmed yesterday morning on a 78-22 vote. Roberts, 50, becomes the youngest Chief Justice since John Marshall in 1801 (who was 46). In addition, Roberts…
Posted to Politics by Kansasman on September 30, 2005 04:31 PM

Bush To Name Supreme Court Nominee Next Week
The Associated Press reports today that, President Bush will name his choice for a nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. Bush was expected to announce his choice in the next few days. White…
Posted to Politics by Kansasman on September 30, 2005 12:22 PM

Chief Justice Roberts To Rule Real Estate ‘Bubble’ a Myth
You may have missed the biggest news of the 21st century straight from the pages of The Little Town Lyar: Judge John J. Roberts, who was confirmed by a Senate vote of 78-22, said he felt the record should be set…
Posted to Politics by Mr. Real Estate on September 30, 2005 06:50 AM

John Roberts Wins Senate Confirmation Vote
On Thursday, September 29th, 2005, John Roberts was overwhelmingly confirmed by the US Senate to become the 17th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. The final vote was 78 in favor, and 22 against. Just who were those 22 Senators…
Posted to Politics by RJ on September 30, 2005 01:41 AM

Roberts Confirmed as Chief Justice
John Roberts has been sworn in as the 17th Chief Justice of the Supreme Court after a surpisingly smooth Senate confirmation. The final vote was 78-22, with all Senate Republicans voting to confirm Roberts and Senate Democrats split down the…
Posted to Politics by LegendaryMonkey on September 29, 2005 06:08 PM

The Democrat’s Dilemma II
The pending nomination to replace Justice Sandra Day O’Connor presents the Democrats with an incredible dilemma. Do they go to the mat and potentially lose in trying to keep a more conservative justice from replacing O’Connor? Or do…
Posted to Politics by Drew McKissick on September 28, 2005 11:32 PM

Quotable Notables 9/27/05
Quotes of Note that reflect what conservatives think. Or are up against. NY’s Schumer So Easily Offended Looking for all the world like a New York shark lawyer, Schumer asked John Roberts at his confirmation hearing, very seriously… So my question…
Posted to Politics by Patfish on September 26, 2005 04:36 AM

John Roberts, Bill Moyers and Fascist Fundamentalists
I watched a bit of the John Roberts hearing recently – trying to guess the implications of the word ‘conservative’ when used. Are all Conservatives also Christian Fundamentalists? I don’t think so. Are all…
Posted to Culture by Patrick Yaeger on September 25, 2005 03:36 PM

The Senate Judiciary Committee Votes In Favor Of Roberts
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted yesterday on the nomination of John Roberts for the position of Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. And they approved his nomination by a vote of 13-5. Here is how the Senators on the…
Posted to Politics by RJ on September 23, 2005 02:21 AM

Should the Dems support Roberts?
If the Democrats try and wage all out war on every front they’re going to scream themselves into irrelevance. A better strategy…
Posted to Politics by Sam Jack on September 21, 2005 10:51 PM

Confirmation Follies
If nothing else, the recently concluded Senate confirmation hearings of Judge John Roberts proved two things. 1) Roberts is perhaps the most qualified nominee for the Supreme Court in its history and 2) liberals are at their most entertaining…
Posted to Politics by Drew McKissick on September 20, 2005 06:44 PM

The Declaration of Independence in 2005, a must read for Americans…
Sometimes, I think we need to remind ourselves why the United States of America came to be. When was the last time anyone really read the Declaration of Independence and pondered just what it was that our forefathers were…
Posted to Politics by Silas Kain on September 17, 2005 05:27 PM

Puddle of Suss: “Supreme Decision”
(Tense music.) With the resignation of Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O’Donnor, President George W. Bush was faced with the decision of nominating a new justice. His dilemma was solved with the nomination of John Roberts. (Roll footage of…
Posted to Video by Matthew T. Sussman on September 17, 2005 04:37 PM

Economic Morality
Like many of you, I’ve been following the John Roberts confirmation hearing and I’ve found it fascinating to hear intelligent, eloquent people from both sides present their cases. Last night, one of the final witnesses against Roberts was Dr. Robert…
Posted to Politics by The Searcher on September 17, 2005 09:13 AM

Here Come Da Judge-Roberts Wows With a Simple Truth
The Senators have bloviated. The special interest groups have had their speak. Next Thursday, 9/22/05, they will vote. I watched all the Senators, the wretched refuse of our teeming shores. They were supposed to be conducting a job…
Posted to Politics by Patfish on September 15, 2005 09:18 PM

Mr. Roberts Goes To Washington
Ever since I read Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, I have had a fascination with American politics. It fluctuates between the rubbernecking of a bystander at a train wreck to appreciation for the genuine intelligence…
Posted to Politics by gypsyman on September 15, 2005 09:17 PM

Roberts & The Senate: The Questions
It seems that the Democrats don’t know how to form the Question they all desperately want answered. Consequently they are asking questions that are rather pathetic. The closest they came was when Durbin (I believe) stumbled about asking (essentially) what…
Posted to Politics by alethinos59 on September 15, 2005 12:01 PM

What should conservatives even WANT the Supreme Court to do?
We’ve gotten so far off the rails from constitutional governance that “strict constructionism” would also be extreme “judicial activism.”
Posted to Politics by Al Barger on September 14, 2005 11:51 PM

The Roberts Confirmation Hearings and the Pledge of Allegiance
“Under God” might well be Chief Justice John Roberts first case. How did Roberts fare against the senatorial blowhards?
Posted to Politics by Patfish on September 14, 2005 07:10 PM

Rehnquist’s Legacy: Bush v. Gore
The recent death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist from complications associated with worshipping Satan have prompted legal scholars and commentators to frame his legacy. The emerging consensus is that Rehnquist was something of a trailblazer because he…
Posted to Politics by The Fifth Dentist on September 9, 2005 11:00 AM

Bury Me In My Robe
William Rehnquist is dead, and his death brings up a number of questions. Of course it brings up the question of the Supreme Court and what the new balance will be now that John Roberts will be taking over and Sandra…
Posted to Politics by Blunderford on September 6, 2005 09:31 PM

Roberts in the Supreme Court
Amid the rightful indignation around the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan etc… one might reasonably wonder whether the race for the Supreme Court really makes that much of a difference. If you ask…
Posted to Politics by La Bamba on September 6, 2005 01:05 PM

In swift move, Bush nominates Roberts as Rehnquist successor
Sept. 5 (Bloomberg) — U.S. President George W. Bush, acting only two days after the death of William H. Rehnquist, said he will nominate federal appeals court Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to be the nation’s 17th chief justice. Roberts, 50,…
Posted to Politics by Sam Jack on September 5, 2005 11:22 AM

Shrub Moves Fast to Replace Rehnquist
Following the tragic embarrassment of the feds’ handling of the Katrina debacle, no one can say that the Shrub dragged his heels on replacing the late William H. Rehnquist as chief justice of the US Supreme Court. Bright and early on…
Posted to Politics by Natalie Davis on September 5, 2005 10:41 AM

Rehnquist not dead
Apparently, the health and, well, deadness, of the Chief Justice is a matter of some debate. Some claim that he continues… Via LearnedLimb: My good friend William Rehnquist always did have excellent timing. He got himself appointed to the bench…
Posted to Politics by Michael D. Bryan on September 5, 2005 06:24 AM

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist Dies of Cancer at Age 80
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, the 16th chief justice of the Supreme Court, died of cancer on Saturday, Sept. 3, 2005 in his Arlington home. A widower since his wife’s death in 1991, he was surrounded by his three…
Posted to Politics by Margaret Romao Toigo on September 4, 2005 11:58 AM

Blind-Sided, Part II: The Next Chief Justice
The Chief Justice is dead; long live the Chief Justice! ****UPDATE**** Well, as you can see, I was WRONG, WRONG, WRONG in my prediction regarding how the President would play the whole nomination process regarding a new Chief Justice. …
Posted to Politics by David Flanagan on September 4, 2005 07:39 AM

BREAKING: William H. Rehnquist Dies…
Article here: Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died Saturday evening at his home in suburban Virginia, said Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathy Arberg. A statement from the spokeswoman said he was surrounded by his three children when he died in Arlington. RIP,…
Posted to Politics by RJ on September 3, 2005 11:51 PM

Chief Justice Rehnquist Dies…
ARLINGTON, VA – Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist passed away this evening, Saturday, September 3, 2005. In the heart of the United States of America’s greatest challenge in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, a man of consistency…
Posted to Politics by Silas Kain on September 3, 2005 11:44 PM

RIP Justice Rehnquist
This just in: US Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist is dead at the age of 80. Rehnquist died this evening at his home in Virginia surrounded…
Posted to Politics by Natalie Davis on September 3, 2005 11:36 PM

Review: Scalia Dissents
I have just finished reading Scalia Dissents by Kevin Ring. I bought this book myself because of the upcoming confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Nominee Judge Roberts. I wanted to see what Scalia’s judicial philosophy really was since…
Posted to Books by Lennie on September 2, 2005 08:34 PM

New letter from John Roberts discovered
I was cleaning out some stuff left behind by previous inhabitants of this house and I discovered this letter: Dear Aunt Mary: Hi! I am at Camp Whitewasp. It is in…
Posted to Politics by Miriam on August 20, 2005 07:49 PM

Roberts made fun of Jacko in 80’s memo
John Roberts’ legal resume is so impeccable that it is almost superhuman. He went to college at Harvard, graduating summa cum laude, and stayed for law school, graduating magna cum laude. After law school, he clerked for…
Posted to Politics by Thad Anderson on August 16, 2005 03:19 PM

I was Wrong About NARAL & Planned Parenthood
I’m probably one of the few bloggers on the net that will admit when he was wrong, and I was wrong about Planned Parenthood and NARAL, and in general the Left as a whole. To lie requires…
Posted to Politics by John Bambenek on August 11, 2005 03:24 PM

The Left: No Lies Left Behind
From Ravings of John C. A. Bambenek In defiance of the truth, NARAL is still insisting that John Roberts supports clinic bombers despite FactCheck debunking the claim, and even the NARAL President saying John Roberts doesn’t support
Posted to Politics by John Bambenek on August 10, 2005 06:40 PM

Actual Concern or Publicity Stunt?…
AP: WASHINGTON – A conservative group in Virginia said Tuesday it would oppose Supreme Court nominee John Roberts’ confirmation because of his work helping overturn a Colorado referendum on gays. The stance by Public Advocate of the…
Posted to Politics by Ryan Clark Holiday on August 10, 2005 05:03 PM

Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts: Gay Rights Champion?
Under the surface a rare firestorm of dissent is brewing within the Republican Party. To squelch the dissent, Republicans are spinning like mad to put to rest the notion, any notion, that John Roberts might be tolerant of Americans…
Posted to Politics by Balletshooz on August 9, 2005 01:23 PM

Media scrambles to find something, anything, to attack Roberts with
In the ongoing campaign to find something that opposition to Roberts can use as a lever for public opinion, the latest buzz is that Roberts did some pro bono work on a Supreme Court gay rights case. They tried…
Posted to Politics by Sam Jack on August 6, 2005 02:33 AM

Blogcritics On John G. Roberts Jr. Supreme Court Nominee
At 50 years old Judge John Roberts Jr., if chosen, will be on the highest court of the land for a long time – and bring the average age of the Justices down at least 10 years. The developing early consensus…
Posted to Politics by Temple Stark on July 20, 2005 01:15 PM

Powered by

About Eric Olsen

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    The only silver lining in this tornado called John Roberts is that the Supreme Court is a powerful institution that profoundly affects its members (with the possible exception of Clarence Thomas, whose opinions, by and large, defy common sense, common decency, and…rats, can’t think of a third “common.” Basically, Neanderthals find change painful.)

    The best example may be Earl Warren,a conservative Republican CA governor. Eisenhauer once called him the worst appointment he’d ever made. Thanks Ike!

    One can only hope that Roberts, once he realizes the full impact of his new role, grows into the job.

    And that doesn’t mean grows liberal or conservative–but understands that the Constitution & Bill of Rights are the two most important documents ever written (with apologies to those who’d vote for the Bible or Koran or Kama Sutra) and must be treated with the utmost care and reverence.

    But it doesn’t matter. I’m not posting much these days because I’ve figured out why Intelligent Design will never fly as a theory. No intelligent designer would ever create a human being.

    Wherever one looks around the world at this species, atrocities so outweigh small moments of grace that we’re not worth the effort.

    In Jamesons Veritas

  • Sandor Jay Sonnen

    As I believe a Roberts Court is inevitable (a prospect that I am not against, and in many cases support), it is important to examine the extent to which liberty will play in the upcoming Court.

    Lawrence v. Texas (02-102) 41 SW 3d 349, designed a very rough frame for what may be a deep national debate, soon to be played out in our nation’s courts.

    Removing the instant issue of consensual, adult, homosexual conduct within one’s home1, the crucial issue in Lawrence worth study are what is “certain conduct”? Liberty interests and “certain conduct” may open an entirely new trial that, like a ski run, will branch into new and different pathways leading to unknown places, while you’re skiing. And to take the metaphor to its conclusion, one doesn’t always end up on the run they originally planned at the outset.

    Students of criminal procedure will recall that an officer’s ability to use a tech device to invade privacy depends greatly on the ability of the common citizen to obtain the same device. Will a liberty interest rise to block police use of such equipment in a warrantless investigation, even where everyone can obtain the device?

    Does a liberty interest allow one to do what he/she wishes with their money, regardless to the societal interest?

    I do not believe that the left or the right has a monopoly in being happy or upset over Lawrence.

    Any other comments along these lines would be welcome.

    Sandor Jay Sonnen

    1 Not to stray too much from the point of this comment, but on this issue of, “within the home”, one could nearly drop that descriptor, as future applications of Lawrence will probably allow that whatever is publicly allowed between two consenting hetrosexual adults would be equally allowed in public between two consenting homosexual adults.

  • red state

    Roberts will be confirmed as chief justice as the Democrats are dragged kicking and screaming as usual. Then Bush will nominate a conservative woman and the Dems will get the character assisantion machine rolling again. They’ll probably have TEddy K., the hero of Chappaquiddack up front lecturing the country on the morality of the new nomineee while Naral, NOW, and MOveon.org run ads that are bold faced lies attacking the nominee.

    But in the end Bush will get who he wants and all the America hating socialists/commie dirtbags and the man hating, bulldike, baby killing, feminazis will be left to bitch and moan like they usually do until the end of thier pathetic useless existences at which time the will retire to hell to burn for eternity with Bill and Hillary, Teddy K., Jane Fonda, Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore and John Kerry.

  • alethinos59

    It would have been wonderful if the Founding Fathers could have spent a bit more time fleshing out the Supreme Court and “such inferior courts” and more importantly the nomination to the SC. However, they would have had to go back further and delve deep, DEEP into Natural Law, specifically Plato’s concept of it, instead of fussing over natural rights, which Plato himself sneered at – in the sense that men “always and will forever argue over the ‘newest right discovered'”. (I am paraphrasing him there in LAWS.)

    What we have instead, and what some of the Founding Fathers feared most, is two political parties. The outcome, with regard to the courts is that they are FAR more interested in PACKING the courts than in seeing judges that STRIVE to discover the flow of Natural Law and how it moves through the Constitution.

    Now we have fools like Scalia who, true to that definition of American genius (someone who can hold two diametrically opposing views at the same time and stand up for both) who is the antithesis of what Plato (and again some of the Founders). Roberts, at least from what I’ve heard of his early opinions, came dangerously close to – GOD HELP US – Bork.

    The only consulation in all this is that we do live in something resembling a democracy. So there is a chance to repair the damage of “earnest men”.

    alethinos

  • Sandor Jay Sonnen

    As I believe a Roberts Court is inevitable (a prospect that I am not against, and in many cases support), it is important to examine the extent to which liberty will play in the upcoming Court.

    Lawrence v. Texas (02-102) 41 SW 3d 349, designed a very rough frame for what may be a deep national debate, soon to be played out in our nation’s courts.

    Removing the instant issue of consensual, adult, homosexual conduct within one’s home1, the crucial issue in Lawrence worth study are what is “certain conduct”? Liberty interests and “certain conduct” may open an entirely new trial that, like a ski run, will branch into new and different pathways leading to unknown places, while you’re skiing. And to take the metaphor to its conclusion, one doesn’t always end up on the run they originally planned at the outset.

    Students of criminal procedure will recall that an officer’s ability to use a tech device to invade privacy depends greatly on the ability of the common citizen to obtain the same device. Will a liberty interest rise to block police use of such equipment in a warrantless investigation, even where everyone can obtain the device?

    Does a liberty interest allow one to do what he/she wishes with their money, regardless to the societal interest?

    I do not believe that the left or the right has a monopoly in being happy or upset over Lawrence.

    Any other comments along these lines would be welcome.

    Sandor Jay Sonnen

    1 Not to stray too much from the point of this comment, but on this issue of, “within the home”, one could nearly drop that descriptor, as future applications of Lawrence will probably allow that whatever is publicly allowed between two consenting hetrosexual adults would be equally allowed in public between two consenting homosexual adults.

  • Eric Olsen

    now that Roberts is in with relative ease, will the administration stay moderate or go way right?

  • http://www.morethings.com/log Al Barger

    I hate to hear that Justice O’Connor is leaving the Supreme Court. But perhaps it’s just as well. Sinead really should concentrate on her musical career. It’s what she does best.

    Replacing O’Connor, I predict WAY out there. Janice Rogers Brown, that would rock some worlds. For starters, would Robert Byrd DARE oppose her?

  • http://www.au.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr010=dkjzqmtae1.app13a&abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=7513&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1241 yezbok drahcir

    Dear God:

    I wish my prime minister, Mr. Paul Martin, had the balls to suggest to the hood ornament of that old roman hate-mongering, aggression-mothering whore from hell that the future will only be better if she would just go to hell. Can’t he just publicly say, “Go ahead and excommunicate me”?

    Oh, my lord, I fear this can never be. Paul’s enduring lack of response [ie. soft-wood-fuck-NAFTA-disagreement], as he very well knows, accommodates the political agenda of those cowards that he ignorantly fears. The pope says, “Be off with his kind”. Small Martin says “”.

    Let the cranky old Vatican cunts live another thousand years – not that we would think by now that there must be a better way. Let not a fourth reich emerge with the same Germanic roots of the preceding three. Let us not notice that the discordant are of the same genetic cesspool as Benedict the sick stink. Not that I’m knock’n Germans or Moslems or any other profile – not at all, my lord.

    Let the could-be messianic stars continue forfeiting the opportunity to shine upon unsuitable kings in exchange for riches and plastic surgery. Let the Ozzys of this world keep holding up the middle finger in salutation to censorship.

    May we all go to hell? Most have been living there – why can’t the rich have a taste? Amen.

    P.S. If you plan to bring me back into this fucked up world, please don’t let my life be any less painful. Bring me back as a paraplegic black lesbian dwarf rabbi who gets stuck watching AIDS-ridden children cry to the heavens for mercy, while your divinely ordained and biblically authorized government officials fuck the world up the ass with more corruption and greed.

    Amen, my sweet lord. Amen.

  • http://www.au.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr010=dkjzqmtae1.app13a&abbr=pr&page=NewsArticle&id=7513&security=1002&news_iv_ctrl=1241 yezbok drahcir

    Oops. I just realized that I posted on the wrong forum.

    I’ve lost track of my multiple browers.

    Any-hoo, I hope something within is relative to controversy.

  • http://paperfrigate.blogspot.com DrPat

    That’s okay, Richard, it’s understandable when you back into a conversation that you might miss what’s being said…

  • http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/08/23/212333.php yezbok drahcir

    .

    I am sincerely ashamed of my nonsensical behavior here.

    A cowardly excuse was not the order of the day. I should have expressed a much more constructive emotion in the first place.

    The URL link will explain more.

  • bruce

    to bad i can’t go back in time and kill holmes,brandise,marshall and brennan.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/alan-kurtz/ Alan Kurtz

    Bruce, you can still go forward in time and learn how to spell: “too” and “Brandeis” for starters.