Archive: Breaking News
Leahy to Vote Against Alito Nomination
The Associated Press reports: Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy said Thursday he will oppose Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito's confirmation, saying he did not believe the conservative judge would be independent of President Bush and the executive branch in his future rulings. "At a time when the president is seizing unprecedented power, the Supreme Court needs to act as a check and to provide balance," Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, said in a speech at Georgetown University's law school. "Based on the hearing and his record, I have no confidence that Judge Alito would provide that check and balance." It is not a surprise that Vermont senator is voting against Alito. He was one of the nominee's harshest interrogators at Alito's confirmation hearings last week. Leahy also has been a critic of President Bush and the White House's actions in the war on terror, including warrantless wiretapping on...
By Lexie Verdon | January 19, 2006; 11:15 AM ET | Comments (31)
Sens. Feinstein, Graham on Alito
Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca., ) and Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) were interviewed by Brit Hume on Fox News Sunday this morning. Here are excerpts: On Monday, confirmation hearings begin for Supreme Court nominee Judge Samuel Alito. For a preview, we're joined by two key members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Republican Lindsey Graham, who comes to us from South Carolina, and Democrat Dianne Feinstein, who joins me here in the studio. Welcome, both. Senator Feinstein, in light of your vote against Judge Roberts, now Chief Justice Roberts, is there any chance you could vote for Judge Alito? FEINSTEIN: Well, first of all, it depends on the hearing. Let me say a couple of things. One, we know this is a conservative nominee. The question is how conservative. The question is what is his respect for individual rights, his position on the expansion of presidential powers, the carrying out the legacy --...
By Fred Barbash | January 8, 2006; 11:04 AM ET | Comments (23)
Brownback on Alito
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) was interviewed by George Stephanopoulis on ABC this morning. Here are excerpts: You heard Senator Kennedy there. He says that Judge Alito has a credibility problem. What's your response? BROWNBACK: I don't think there's a credibility problem at all. You've got a person here that served on the bench, the 3rd Circuit bench, for 15 years. I think he's got excellent credibility, and I think he has a tremendous track record that's there for us to look at. One can go out and try to fish around for a lot of issues and try to throw different things up on the wall, but at the end of the day we have 15 years of written opinions on a court of appeals in the United States. And that is really what we ought to be looking at to determine whether or not he should go on the...
By Fred Barbash | January 8, 2006; 10:58 AM ET | Email a Comment
Kennedy on Alito
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.,) was questioned this morning by George Stephanopoulos on ABC's "This Week." Here are excerpts: STEPHANOPOULOS: You really fired a shot across Alito's yesterday in The Washington Post. I want to show our readers the headline. You laid out your objections under the headline Alito's Credibility Problem. Have you decided that the only way to beat Alito's nomination is by raising questions about his character? KENNEDY: I think Judge Alito has a lot to respond to in the Judiciary Committee. I think whether his success or failure is really going to be his performance in the Judiciary Committee, not just for the members of the Judiciary Committee but for the American people. Anyone has to... STEPHANOPOULOS: But you called his credibility into question....
By Fred Barbash | January 8, 2006; 10:54 AM ET | Comments (22)
More Alito Documents
More documents pertaining to Samuel A. Alito were released this morning. To view them click here, for the National Archives site....
By Fred Barbash | December 28, 2005; 09:07 AM ET | Comments (5)
Poll Finds Support for Alito
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds that "a majority of Americans now support the confirmation of U.S. Appeals Court Judge Samuel A. Alito to the Supreme Court to fill the seat of retiring Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.....The survey found that 54 percent of the public say the Senate should confirm Alito while 28 percent say he should not be approved. That marks a modest increase in public support for Alito since November, when 49 percent said he should be confirmed and 29 percent said he should not. In both surveys, about one in five Americans said they did not yet know enough about the nominee to have an opinion. Click here to read the article by Rich Morin....
By Fred Barbash | December 21, 2005; 06:21 AM ET | Comments (20)
Frist on Alito Filibuster
From the Associated Press: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Sunday he is prepared to strip Democrats of their to ability to filibuster if they try to stall Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court. "The answer is yes," Frist said when asked if he would act to change Senate procedures to restrict a Democratic filibuster. "Supreme Court justice nominees deserve an up-or-down vote, and it would be absolutely wrong to deny him that." In recent weeks, Senate Democrats have questioned whether Alito, a federal appeals court judge, has the proper judicial temperament and ideology to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Several Democrats have said that Alito's views on issues such as voting rights and abortion could provoke a filibuster unless he allays their concerns about his commitment to civil rights. Alito's confirmation hearings begin Jan. 9 in the Senate Judiciary Committee....
By Fred Barbash | December 11, 2005; 12:06 PM ET | Comments (21)
RNC Criticizes Boxer
This is a press release from the Republican National Committee regarding Sen. Boxer's remarks in the post below. "With Senator Boxer's blatant lie this morning, Democrats once again illustrated their clear commitment to distorting Judge Alito's record. What makes today's smear regarding reapportionment particularly stunning is that it was only two days ago that Sen. Specter clearly stated Judge Alito believes that one man one vote is 'very deeply embedded' and is a 'principle which is settled and beyond attack'. Every time the Democrats desperately attempt to misrepresent Judge Alito's record, they undermine their own credibility when it comes to the nomination." -- Brian Jones, Communications Director...
By Fred Barbash | December 4, 2005; 12:24 PM ET | Comments (7)
Sen. Boxer on Alito Memos: "Very Serious."
Excerpts from interview with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), on Fox News Sunday by Chris Wallace: WALLACE: ...[Let's] move, if we can, to the question of the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. BOXER: Sure. WALLACE: A memo he wrote when he worked for the solicitor general's office back in 1985 was released this week, and let me put up a key quote on the screen right now, if I can. He said, What can be made of this opportunity to advance the goals of bringing about the eventual overruling of Roe v. Wade and, in the meantime, of mitigating its effect? Alito now says that those were personal views, the views of an advocate, and don't reflect what he would do as a judge. BOXER: Well, look. Personal views are different than this. Personal views are whether you support the right of a woman to choose and your...
By Fred Barbash | December 4, 2005; 11:31 AM ET | Comments (11)
Excerpts from Sen. Specter's News Conference
SPECTER: Afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I met with Judge Alito for a little more than an hour this morning to get his responses to certain issues which have been raised in the news media. My job as chairman is to keep the playing field level and to be sure that there is a fair and thorough hearing for Judge Alito. I'm concerned that we not have a replay of what happened to White House Counsel Harriet Miers, who was really sort of run out of town on a rail. The process was shanghaied with the prejudicing of the position by the radio and TV talk shows and the columns. And we live in a free society and all of that is an entirely appropriate part of the process, but I do not want to see it get out of hand with respect to Judge Alito....
By Fred Barbash | December 2, 2005; 01:16 PM ET | Comments (4)
Alito's Recollections of Princeton Club
David Espo, of the Associated Press, reports on one of the disclosures Alito made in his formal response to the Senate, which also was released today: Alito stepped carefully around his one-time membership in Concerned Alumni of Princeton, a conservative organization that sparked controversy two decades ago by saying school officials had lowered admission standards to accept women and minority applicants. "A document I recently reviewed reflects that I was a member of the group in the 1980s. Apart from that document, I have no recollection of being a member, of attending meetings or otherwise participating in the activities of the group," he wrote the Senate....
By Lexie Verdon | November 30, 2005; 05:03 PM ET | Comments (5)
NARAL Response
NARAL Pro-Choice America, an abortion-rights group, has already registered its opposition to Alito. But today's disclosures about his work during the Reagan administration brought new disapproval. In a statement posted on the group's Web site, President Nancy Keenan said, "Samuel Alito's writings reflect a visceral opposition to Roe v. Wade. It is clear that his legal philosophy calls for a calculated strategy to dismantle fundamental constitutional protections for women, including the health exception issue that the Supreme Court is considering right now. Alito's memo is a litany of legal strategies designed to undermine women's reproductive health. He even confuses birth control with abortion and advocates additional restrictions on women's access to contraception. If Alito replaces Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the Court will shift in a direction that jeopardizes the fundamental values of freedom and privacy that a vast majority of Americans want protected."...
By Lexie Verdon | November 30, 2005; 04:43 PM ET | Comments (5)
Schumer Finds Memo "Stunning'
Jesse J. Holland of the Associated Press reports: Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. and a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the memo "stunning." "These latest revelations cast serious doubt on whether Judge Alito can be at all objective on the right to privacy and a woman's right to choose," Schumer said. White House spokesman Steve Schmidt called Schumer's criticism "unfair." "Judge Alito should be evaluated on his 15 years of jurisprudence as a federal judge where he has authored hundreds of opinions," Schmidt said. "On some of those cases, he has upheld abortion rights. In other cases he has not. To leap to conclusions and try to infer future decisions from 20-year-old memos borders on the silly."...
By Lexie Verdon | November 30, 2005; 04:25 PM ET | Comments (1)
Neas's Criticism
The liberal lobbying organization People for the American Way was quick to criticize Alito over his efforts in the 1980s to get Roe v. Wade overturned. "This new document isn't just a smoking gun. It's a smoking cannon. The American people should have no doubt that Samuel Alito is poised to change more than 25 years of reproductive rights for women in America," said the group's president Ralph G. Neas, in a statement released on the organization's Web site. "As with Robert Bork in 1987, the best evidence against his confirmation is his written record over the past quarter of a century."...
By Lexie Verdon | November 30, 2005; 04:18 PM ET | Comments (3)
Alito Pushed for U.S. Brief Suggesting Overruling of Roe
Samuel A. Alito urged the Justice Department in 1985 to suggest to the Supreme Court that it consider overruling Roe v. Wade. (Click here for news story.) In a memo from Alito circulated in the department, he suggested filing a friend of the court brief stating that "we disagree with Roe v. Wade and would welcome the opportunity to brief the issue of whether, and if so to what extent, that decision should be overruled." In the memo, Alito said he found "this approach preferable to a frontal assault on Roe v. Wade. It has most of the advantages of a brief devoted to the overruling of Roe v Wade," he wrote. "It makes our position clear, does not even tacitly concede Roe's legitimacy, and signals that we regard the question as live and open. "At the same time," Alito wrote, "it is free of...
By Fred Barbash | November 30, 2005; 11:46 AM ET | Comments (12)
Alito Documents Released
More Alito DOJ documents have been released by the National Archives, just as the Alito questionnaire is being released, just as the oral arguments in the abortion case are underway, just as Washington is reacting to the president's speech on the war in Iraq.Click here for the documents....
By Fred Barbash | November 30, 2005; 11:18 AM ET | Comments (4)
Alito Questionnaire Released
Jesse J. Holland of the Associated Press reports: Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito told senators Wednesday that federal judges must constantly guard against using judicial activism to get the results they want, especially when dealing with the nation's highest law, the U.S. Constitution. "Our constitutional system relies heavily on the judiciary to restrain itself," Alito said in a 64-page response to a Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire. "To do this, judges must engage in a continual process of self-questioning about the way in which they are performing the responsibilities of their offices," he continued. "Judges must also have faith that the cause of justice in the long run is best served if they scrupulously heed the limits of their role rather than transgressing those limits in an effort to achieve a desired result in a particular case." In some instances, Alito said, Congress can simply write a new law to blunt...
By Fred Barbash | November 30, 2005; 11:13 AM ET | Comments (1)
Alito DOJ Documents
Thomas Ferraro of Reuters reports: As a top U.S. Justice Department lawyer two decades ago, U.S. Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito backed tougher punishment for certain civil rights violations as well as keeping fingerprint records of Iranian and Afghan refugees, documents released Monday showed. The papers also showed Alito wrote that the FBI could not transfer to the National Archives confidential tax returns, grand jury and electronic surveillance materials. But Alito told the Internal Revenue Service its lawyers, with Justice Department approval, could secretly record face-to-face conversations with taxpayers....
By Fred Barbash | November 28, 2005; 07:01 PM ET | Email a Comment
Scotus Drops Facade
Court Divided in New Schism The Associated Press reports; A basketball-sized piece of marble moulding fell from the facade over the entrance to the Supreme Court, landing on the steps near visitors waiting to enter the building. No one was injured when the stone fell. The marble was part of the dentil moulding that serves as a frame for the frieze of statues atop the court's main entrance....
By Fred Barbash | November 28, 2005; 10:54 AM ET | Comments (7)
Allito Ad Wars
AP A low-budget ad skirmish popped up over Samuel Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court on Thursday, liberal groups depicting him as an agent of the right wing and conservatives claiming his critics "want to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance." Three separate groups unleashed commercials while Alito's continuing round of senatorial courtesy calls produced some of the most pointed Democratic reaction to date. "Frankly, I remain very concerned about whether he understands the importance of an equal America," said Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar. "It seemed to me he wants to move the country back to the pre-Warren Court days," said the only Hispanic senator, referring to a judicial era that brought an end to public school segregation and established the election principle of one-man one-vote. ...
By Fred Barbash | November 17, 2005; 05:33 PM ET | Comments (2)
Schumer: Not a slam dunk.
Jesse J. Holland of AP reports: Democrats said on Wednesday that Samuel Alito's confirmation was not guaranteed as senators kept the focus on a 20-year-old document in which the Supreme Court nominee asserted that the Constitution "does not protect a right to an abortion." "Anyone who thinks that this nomination is a foregone conclusion is sadly mistaken," said New York Sen. Charles Schumer, one of several Democrats who used Senate speeches to criticize Alito. "There are too many questions still to be answered, too many doubts still to be alleviated to say that this nomination is a slam dunk," Schumer said....
By Fred Barbash | November 16, 2005; 03:50 PM ET | Email a Comment
Alito and Abortion
Jesse J. Holland of AP reports: The Samuel Alito who argued against abortion rights in 1985 was "an advocate seeking a job" with the conservative Reagan administration, the Alito who is now a Supreme Court nominee told Democrats Tuesday. The current version "thinks he's a wiser person" with "a better grasp and understanding about constitutional rights and liberties," senators said as Alito tried to play down a 20-year-old document in which he asserted "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." At the same time, some anti-abortion groups warned Alito not to go too far if he hopes to retain their support. "A nominee who is willing to take the seemingly mandated Roe oath, whereby they testify that it is settled law, never to be overturned, is not the type of justice worthy of pro-life support," said Stephen G. Peroutka, chairman of the National Pro-Life Action Center....
By Fred Barbash | November 15, 2005; 06:23 PM ET | Comments (3)
Alito to Feinstein: "It was different then...."
Sen. Diannne Feinstein (D-Calif.) took some questions after meeting with Judge Alito. Here are excerpts: QUESTION: Did you ask the judge about the job application issue with his comments about abortion? FEINSTEIN: Yes, he did. QUESTION: And? FEINSTEIN: And what he told me was this. He said, First of all, it was different then. He said, I was an advocate seeking a job. It was a political job. And that was 1985. I'm now a judge, you know. I've been on the circuit court for 15 years. And it's very different. I'm not an advocate. I don't give heed to my personal views. What I do is interpret the law....
By Fred Barbash | November 15, 2005; 11:41 AM ET | Comments (3)
Schumer: "Strongest statement we've seen...."
By Jesse J. Holland, AP: Twenty years ago, Samuel Alito was just trying to catch the eye of Reagan administration officials looking to fill a political slot in the Justice Department. But the young conservative's boast about being "particularly proud" of his work helping to argue that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion" may now make it more difficult for him in his quest to join the Supreme Court. "This is the strongest statement we've seen from a nominee on this very controversial subject for a long time," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee that will hold Alito's confirmation hearing. (Document and discussion here.)...
By Fred Barbash | November 14, 2005; 08:34 PM ET | Comments (64)
Alito Opposed Right to Abortion, Warren Court Reapportionment, Religion Cases. Believed Govt. Should Protect "traditional values."
Click here for the statement by Samuel A. Alito Jr., in which he states some of his views, in 1985, on the absence of a constitutional right to abortion, his belief in the role of government in protecting "traditional values, his opposition to Warren Court reapportionment, Establishment Clause and affirmative action decisions, among other matters. This was first reported this morning by the Washington Times. Other documents released by the Reagan library can be found here. I have copied the most relevant portions below: "I am and always have been a conservative and an adherent to the same philosophical views that I believe are central to this Administration.....I believe very strongly in limited government, federalism, free enterprise, the supremacy of the elected branches of government, the need for a strong defense and effective law enforcement, and the legitimacy of a government role in protecting traditional values. In the field of...
By Fred Barbash | November 14, 2005; 02:10 PM ET | Comments (40)
Robes Blogger Disrobed; A3G@DOJ
Jeffrey Toobin at The New Yorker has an interview with one David Lat, described as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Newark, who confesses to being the celebrated Article III Groupie (A3G), coquettish blogger-in-chief at Underneath Their Robes, where the nation's judges get rockstar treatment and are often described as "hotties." "She" turns out to be a "He." His elaboration can be found here. Further elaboration can be found at How Appealing....
By Fred Barbash | November 14, 2005; 09:15 AM ET | Email a Comment
Washington Times: "Alito rejected abortion as right."
The Washington Times reports obtaining a 1985 document in which it says, Alito wrote that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." Here's the relevant passage from the story: "It has been an honor and source of personal satisfaction for me to serve in the office of the Solicitor General during President Reagan's administration and to help to advance legal positions in which I personally believe very strongly," he wrote. "I am particularly proud of my contributions in recent cases in which the government has argued in the Supreme Court that racial and ethnic quotas should not be allowed and that the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." The document is apparently a letter accompanying an application for a job in the Reagan administration, following Alito's stint in the Office of the Solicitor General. The Times also says that:The document also provides...
By Fred Barbash | November 14, 2005; 04:09 AM ET | Comments (24)
Alito Denies Conflict of Interest
Washington Post staff writer Charles Babington reports that Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the head of the Judiciary Committee, and Samuel Alito exchanged letters today and the Supreme Court nominee said he did nothing wrong in ruling on cases that involved financial companies in which he had investments. Specter's letter said that "[b]ased on the judgments of two experts in judicial ethics which have been submitted to the Judiciary Committee, it is my conclusion that there has been no impropriety on your part." But he urged Alito to quickly comment on the matter because in past Supreme Court nominations, "we have seen issues which may be minor, unmeritorious, or even non-existent, proliferate into major controversies." Here's Babington's story on the issue from the Thursday paper. Alito wrote back in a letter that he may have been "unduly restrictive in my 1990 questionnaire" for a lower court when he promised not to...
By Lexie Verdon | November 10, 2005; 06:42 PM ET | Comments (5)
Specter Asks for Alito Response on Vanguard
The AP reports: Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., called Thursday for Alito to respond quickly to the Vanguard matter to keep it from becoming a major issue -- even though Specter told Alito he thinks "there has been no impropriety on your part." "In Supreme Court nominations which are so important for so many reasons, we have seen issues which may be minor, unmeritorious and even nonexistent, proliferate into major controversies by those who are opposed for other reasons," Specter said in a letter to Alito. See previous post on this....
By Fred Barbash | November 10, 2005; 03:04 PM ET | Email a Comment
AG Gonzales worried about SCOTUS "reliance on foreign law."
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, in prepared remarks, takes on Justices Breyer and Kennedy, among others, for "reliance on foreign law" in recent opinions. He says "the use of foreign law poses a direct threat to legitimacy, including to the legitimacy of the Court itself." He cites, among other cases, Roper v. Simmons (barring capital punishment for those under 18 at the time of the crime.) Following are excerpts of of prepared remarks by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales at the University of Chicago Law School: Last week, when the President announced his nomination of Judge Sam Alito to be Associate Justice on the Supreme Court, Judge Alito said that he holds the Supreme Court "in reverence"; it represents to him "our dedication as a free and open society to liberty and opportunity, and, as it says above the entrance to the Supreme Court, 'equal justice under law."' Judge Alito's...
By Fred Barbash | November 9, 2005; 05:08 PM ET | Email a Comment
Frist Warning on Filbuster
The Chicago Tribune has an op-ed by Majority Leader Sen. Bill Frist, curious considering the absence of a serious filibuster threat, warning that if "members of the Democratic minority persist in blocking a vote on Alito's nomination" the Senate will have to deploy the "constitutional option."I'm willing to consider any reasonable proposal on debate: If the Democrats believe that each senator should have a full hour to speak uninterrupted about Alito's nomination, I am open to the idea. But I will not negotiate about the Senate's constitutional duty to vote on the president's judicial nominees..... If members of the Democratic minority persist in blocking a vote on Alito's nomination, the Senate will have no choice but to do what. Byrd did: exercise its constitutional rights and bring Alito's nomination up for a vote. I hope that the Senate will conduct Alito's confirmation process with customary courtesy and civility. The process...
By Fred Barbash | November 9, 2005; 04:31 PM ET | Comments (2)
Leahy Comments on Alito, Miers
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) appared on Wolf Blitzer's "Situation Room" on CNN. He was non-committal on the filibuster question. BLITZER: You're the ranking Democrat of the Senate Judiciary Committee. You'll be holding confirmation hearings in January for Judge Samuel Alito. Joe Biden the other day, on Sunday, suggested a filibuster probably would not be appropriate right now. Do you agree with him? LEAHY: I agree we ought to have the hearing, make up the minds after the hearing. I have done this with both Democratic and Republican nominees. I've always said I'll make up my mind once the hearing is over. I think that's what we should do....
By Fred Barbash | November 8, 2005; 06:52 PM ET | Comments (2)
Alito's Senior Thesis: Have a Read
The Princeton University Library has posted a copy of Alito's senior thesis. It's entitled "An Introduction to the Italian Constitutional Court."...
By Fred Barbash | November 8, 2005; 06:08 PM ET | Email a Comment
Specter: Hearings Start Jan. 9
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Republican-controlled Senate will begin hearings Jan. 9 on Judge Samuel Alito's appointment to the Supreme Court, spurning President Bush's call for a final confirmation vote by year's end. "It's simply wasn't possible to accommodate the schedule that the White House wanted," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He outlined a schedule that envisions five days of hearings, followed by a vote in committee on Jan. 17 and the full Senate on Jan. 20....
By Fred Barbash | November 3, 2005; 05:29 PM ET | Comments (7)
Video: Bush Announces Alito Nomination
Click below to watch video of President Bush's announcement of the Alito nomination: var movieSrc = "http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/mmedia/player/player.swf?whichMode=normal&justify=left&playad=no&mediatype=stream&postdir=politics&postvideo=103105-1v&cuesfile=none&autoplay=no&starttime=0&endtime=0&largerver=none&image=none" ; //URL OF WHERE .SWF MOVIE IS PUBLISHED var movieWidth = "454" ; //FLASH MOVIE AND BACK-UP GRAPHIC WIDTH var movieHeight = "275" ; //FLASH MOVIE AND BACK-UP GRAPHIC HEIGHT var backupGraphic = "no" ; // If you have a backup graphic "yes" or "no" var graphicSrc = "" ; var graphicLink = "" ; //requiredVersion: Change this to 8 to test your alternate text. var requiredVersion = 7; // version the user needs to view site (max is 7, min is 2) var useRedirect = false; // "true" loads new flash or non-flash page into browser // "false" embeds movie or alternate html code into current page // set next three vars if useRedirect is true... var flashPage = "flash.htm"; // the location of the flash movie page var noFlashPage = "noflash.htm";...
By washingtonpost.com Editors | October 31, 2005; 09:03 AM ET | Comments (1)
Text of Bush Announcement
Text of President Bush's announcement: BUSH: Good morning. I'm pleased to announce my nomination of Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. as associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge Alito is one of the most accomplished and respected judges in America. And his long career in public service has given him an extraordinary breadth of experience. As a Justice Department official, federal prosecutor and judge on the United States Court of Appeals, Sam Alito has shown a mastery of the law, a deep commitment of justice, and he is a man of enormous character....
By Fred Barbash | October 31, 2005; 08:31 AM ET | Comments (6)
Alito Announced: PFAW Denounces
Here is a press relese from People for the American Way:BUSH PUTS DEMANDS OF FAR-RIGHT ABOVE INTERESTS OF AMERICANSWITH HIGH COURT NOMINATION OF RIGHT-WING ACTIVIST ALITO PFAW will wage massive national effort to defeat nominee who would dramatically shift balance of Court President Bush put the demands of his far-right political base above Americans' constitutional rights and legal protections by nominating federal appeals court Judge Samuel Alito to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, said People for the American Way President Ralph G. Neas. "Right-wing leaders vetoed Miers because she failed their ideological litmus test. With Judge Alito, President Bush has obediently picked a nominee who passes that test with flying colors."...
By Fred Barbash | October 31, 2005; 08:26 AM ET | Comments (29)
Alito Bio From White House
Bush announced the nomination of Alito shortly after 8 a.m. JUDGE SAMUEL A. ALITO JR., BIOGRAPHY RELEASED BY WHITE HOUSE Samuel A. Alito, Jr., was born in April, 1950, in Trenton, New Jersey. Alito received his bachelor's degree from Princeton University and attended Yale Law School, where he served as an editor on the Yale Law Journal. Alito clerked for Judge Leonard Garth of the Third Circuit, who is now his colleague on that court. From 1977-1980, Alito served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the appellate division, where he argued cases before the circuit court to which he was later appointed. From 1981-1985, Alito served as Assistant to the Solicitor General. He has argued 12 cases on behalf of the federal government in the U.S. Supreme Court and he has argued numerous others before the federal courts of appeals. From 1985-1987, Alito served...
By Fred Barbash | October 31, 2005; 07:58 AM ET | Comments (12)
Alito Is the Choice
Peter Baker of The Washington Post reports that Bush will name Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. of the 3d Circuit to the Supreme Court....
By Fred Barbash | October 31, 2005; 06:49 AM ET | Comments (24)
Reports: Definitely Alito
The AP is reporting that two Republican officials now say Judge Samuel A. Alito is indeed the choice. CNN and Reuters say they have confirmed this report. An announcement is reported set for 8 this morning....
By Fred Barbash | October 31, 2005; 06:16 AM ET | Comments (1)
Alito, Luttig, Batchelder, Owen, Surprise
David D. Kirkpatrick in the New York Times has a longer short short list than The Post, which only mentions Alito, Luttig and Batchelder. Jan Crawford Greenburg in the Chicago Tribune says it's down to Alito and Luttig, but quoted sources cautioning that Bush "could pick someone else," such as Owen. Batchelder appears to be the new factor here. Here is an interesting profile in her hometown paper from 1999, courtesy of ConfirmThem (which, in its menu of profiles to the right of the page, will give you a sense of what GOP partisans are saying about various candidates). For excellent short profiles of some of the other contenders, see this July article by Emily Bazelon and David Newman in Slate....
By Fred Barbash | October 31, 2005; 03:25 AM ET | Email a Comment
Alito, Luttig, Batchelder
Peter Baker of The Washington Post reports that an announcement may come Monday. The short, short list is down to Alito and Judges J. Michael Luttig and Alice Batchelder. (See Tom Goldstein's take on Alito and Luttig at the SCOTUS blog.) Batchelder, 61, has served on the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit since 1991 after six years as a district judge. She voted to uphold Ohio's partial-birth abortion ban and against the University of Michigan's affirmative action program. She also once sat on a case involving Wal-Mart even though her husband owned stock, for which she later admitted error, an issue that initially caused some White House concern about nominating her....
By Fred Barbash | October 30, 2005; 08:21 PM ET | Comments (6)
Cornyn Doesn't Expect to Be Asked
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), whose name was floated by some people after Miers withdrew last week, said today on ABC's "This Week" that he does not expect to be nominated by President Bush for the high court. He said he expects a solid conservative with judicial experience to be nominated....
By Lexie Verdon | October 30, 2005; 12:06 PM ET | Comments (6)
Report: Narrowed to Alito or Luttig
The White House appears to be floating the names of appellate judges Samuel Alito and Michael Luttig as the two top contenders for the court in the wake of Harriet Miers withdrawal. See this report from the Los Angeles Times, this from Reuters and this from Jan Crawford Greenburg's story in theChicago Tribune....
By Fred Barbash | October 29, 2005; 09:22 PM ET | Comments (10)
White House: No SCOTUS Announcement Today
White House spokesman Scott McClellan tells reporters there will be no announcement today of a Supreme Court nominee. The Hotline, meanwhile, reports that it will come at the beginning of next week....
By Fred Barbash | October 28, 2005; 10:50 AM ET | Comments (1)
Alliance for Justice Reacts
Nan Aron, head of the Alliance for Justice, issued this statement:An influential segment of the right wing was profoundly disappointed that, with Harriet Miers, the president did not nominate a proven 'movement' conservative who would carry out their political agenda on the bench. They have been clamoring for the withdrawal of Ms. Miers' nomination for weeks. What has happened today is an ominous indication of capitulation to such pressure. An independent judiciary is the crown jewel of our democracy. It is too vital to be used as a means of placating a political party's base. "As the president makes another attempt to fill Sandra Day O'Connor's pivotal seat, we encourage him to work in good faith with members of both parties to choose a consensus nominee who is committed to equal justice. The new nominee should not merely serve the interests of the radical right. He or she must serve...
By Fred Barbash | October 27, 2005; 10:46 AM ET | Email a Comment
Sen. Reid's Reaction
Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the minority leader of the Senate, issued this response on his Web site: "The radical right wing of the Republican Party killed the Harriet Miers nomination. Apparently, Ms. Miers did not satisfy those who want to pack the Supreme Court with rigid ideologues. "I had recommended that the President consider nominating Ms. Miers because I was impressed with her record of achievement as the managing partner of a major Texas law firm and the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association. In those roles she was a strong supporter of law firm diversity policies and a leader in promoting legal services for the poor. But these credentials are not good enough for the right wing: they want a nominee with a proven record of supporting their skewed goals. "In choosing a replacement for Ms. Miers, President Bush should not reward the bad behavior of his...
By Lexie Verdon | October 27, 2005; 09:43 AM ET | Comments (52)
Sen. Frist's Reaction
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) released this statement on his Web site: "Harriet Miers has asked the President to withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court. I respect her decision and appreciate her service to our country. "I look forward with anticipation to the President naming the next nominee quickly. "We remain ready to fulfill our duty to provide advice and consent on judicial nominees. And the Supreme Court still awaits its next justice--a highly qualified nominee who is committed to upholding the Constitution and who believes in the limited role of a judge to interpret the law and not legislate from the bench."...
By Lexie Verdon | October 27, 2005; 09:36 AM ET | Comments (13)
Bush's Official Response to Miers
Here is the official text of President Bush's announcement about Miers's withdrawal. STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT Today, I have reluctantly accepted Harriet Miers' decision to withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States. I nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court because of her extraordinary legal experience, her character, and her conservative judicial philosophy. Throughout her career, she has gained the respect and admiration of her fellow attorneys. She has earned a reputation for fairness and total integrity. She has been a leader and a pioneer in the American legal profession. She has worked in important positions in state and local government and in the bar. And for the last five years, she has served with distinction and honor in critical positions in the Executive Branch. I understand and share her concern, however, about the current state of the Supreme Court confirmation process. It is clear that...
By Lexie Verdon | October 27, 2005; 09:26 AM ET | Comments (7)
Miers's Letter to Bush
Here's the text of the letter from Harriet Miers to President Bush: Dear Mr. President: I write to withdraw as a nominee to serve as an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. I have been greatly honored and humbled by the confidence that you have shown in me, and have appreciated immensely your support and the support of many others. However, I am concerned that the confirmation process presents a burden for the White House and our staff that is not in the best interest of the country. As you know, members of the Senate have indicated their intention to seek documents about my service in the White House in order to judge whether to support me. I have been informed repeatedly that in lieu of records, I would be expected to testify about my service in the White House to demonstrate my experience and judicial...
By Lexie Verdon | October 27, 2005; 09:24 AM ET | Comments (3)
Miers Withdraws
By Fred Barbash Washington Post Staff Writer Harriet Miers withdrew this morning as a nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court. In announcing the decision, Miers and President Bush cited their concern with the requests of members of the Senate Judiciary Committee for documents dealing with her work as White House Counsel that the administration has chosen to withhold as privileged. But the Miers nomination to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was in deep trouble, with little support in the Senate, open criticism from many Senators of both parties, and an outpouring of opposition from conservative activists and intellectuals. Miers told the president in a letter of withdrawal that she was "concerned that the confirmation process presents a burden for the White House and our staff that is not in the best interests of the country." Bush responded that he was "reluctantly" accepting the decision. "I nominated Harriet Miers to...
By Fred Barbash | October 27, 2005; 09:23 AM ET | Comments (14)
Miers Withdraws
Harriet Miers has withdrawn as a nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, the White House says....
By Fred Barbash | October 27, 2005; 08:57 AM ET | Comments (9)
Specter Questions
By Amy Goldstein and Charles Babington in The Washington Post: The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee warned Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers Wednesday that he intends during confirmation hearings to probe her views of the Bush administration's detention of suspected terrorists in the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, making clear he remains uncertain of her command of complex constitutional issues. Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., dispatched a letter to Miers, the White House's top lawyer, saying that she must also convince the Senate that as a justice she would be independent of President Bush and would not give him "any special deference" on cases before the court. In particular, Specter said, he will press her to disclose her personal views of three recent Supreme Court rulings that detainees in the terrorism fight have somewhat greater rights than the administration has wanted to give them. The new pressure from Specter,...
By Fred Barbash | October 26, 2005; 09:40 PM ET | Comments (2)
Senators Press on Locke Liddell Shelters
Jonathan Weisman reports in The Washington Post: Senators from both parties are pressing Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers about her former Texas law firm's lucrative business helping to promote tax shelters that were subsequently deemed abusive by the Internal Revenue Service. The actions of the firm Locke Liddell and Sapp, which Miers headed for much of the 1990s, received glancing scrutiny early this year, when the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a scathing report on the tax shelter industry. The report quoted the legal adviser of a potential investor as blasting the firm for effectively signing off on a "classic 'sham' tax shelter."...
By Fred Barbash | October 26, 2005; 09:36 PM ET | Comments (1)
New Questions for Miers
Jesse J. Holland of the Associated Press wrote this afternoon that the Judiciary Committee chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), sent a letter to Harriet Miers telling her to expect questions about the White House's policies on the war on terror and about whether she can be independent of the Bush administration. Specter's letter to Miers asked whether there were "any limitations" as to how long Guantanamo Bay detainees could be held. He also told Miers to expect to be asked the long-running question about Congress's ability to declare war versus the president's ability to send troops into a military action, the AP reported. "Was the Vietnam conflict a war which should have, as a matter of constitutional law, required a declaration of war by Congress?" Specter asked....
By Lexie Verdon | October 26, 2005; 03:40 PM ET | Comments (2)
HEM May Give Speech
By Charles Babington and Amy Goldstein report in The Washington Post: The Bush administration, concerned that vocal critics are wounding Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers while she quietly prepares for her Senate hearing 12 days from now, is considering ways to fight back -- possibly by having her make a speech -- sources familiar with the discussions said yesterday....
By Fred Barbash | October 26, 2005; 03:11 AM ET | Comments (1)
HEM on 'Self-Determination'
Jo Becker reports in TWP:Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers said in a speech more than a decade ago that "self-determination" should guide decisions about abortion and school prayer and that in cases where scientific facts are disputed and religious beliefs vary, "government should not act." In a 1993 speech to a Dallas women's group, Miers talked about abortion, the separation of church and state, and how the issues play out in the legal system. "The underlying theme in most of these cases is the insistence of more self-determination," she said. "And the more I think about these issues, the more self-determination makes sense." In that speech and others in the early 1990s when she was president of the Texas Bar Association, Miers also defended judges who order lawmakers to address social concerns. While judicial activism is derided by many conservatives, Miers said that sometimes "officials would rather abandon to the...
By Fred Barbash | October 26, 2005; 03:08 AM ET | Email a Comment
TV ad against Miers
Jesse J. Holland of the AP reports: A conservative group opposing Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers announced plans Tuesday to broadcast a TV ad calling for President Bush to withdraw her nomination. The White House said it was standing behind Miers. "She is going to be going before the Senate Judiciary Committee in less than two weeks," Bush spokesman Scott McClellan said. "She looks forward to answering their questions. And I think that people should not try to rush to judgment on it." The ad, by Americans for Better Justice, is the first anti-Miers television ad, and it demonstrates the ongoing battle the White House is facing over her nomination. A relatively small purchase, it will air for a week on a single cable station....
By Fred Barbash | October 25, 2005; 06:30 PM ET | Email a Comment
Bush Comments on Miers Today
Here are excerpts from the president's comments today on the Miers nomination. QUESTION: Mr. President, as a newspaper reported on Saturday, is the White House working on a contingency plan for the withdrawal of Harriet Miers' nomination? BUSH: Harriet Miers is an extraordinary woman. She was a legal pioneer in Texas. She was ranked one of the top 50 women lawyers in the United States on a consistent basis....
By Fred Barbash | October 24, 2005; 12:49 PM ET | Comments (69)
Bush: No Miers WH Records Released
AP reporting via The Washington Post: President Bush said Monday that he will not release any records of his conversations with Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers that could threaten the confidentiality of the advice that presidents get from their lawyers. "It's a red line I'm not willing to cross," Bush said. Both Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee are demanding more documents on Miers, including from her work at Bush's counsel. "People can learn about Harriet Miers through hearings, but we are not going to destroy this business about people being able to walk into the Oval Office to say, Mr. President, this is my advice," Bush said after a meeting with his Cabinet. Bush did not directly answer the question that was posed to him by a reporter at the end of the meeting _ whether the White House is working on contingency plans to withdraw Miers...
By Fred Barbash | October 24, 2005; 12:26 PM ET | Comments (6)
White House Confident
AP reports: The White House said Monday that President Bush is confident Harriet Miers will be confirmed to the Supreme Court, even though a Democrat on the Senate panel that will hold hearings on her nomination said she doesn't have the votes. Republicans countered that Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., cannot predict how the GOP-controlled Senate will decide Miers' fate. Many Republicans have yet to commit to approve President Bush's second nominee to the high court. Presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush is committed to sticking with Miers until the Senate vote. "He's confident that she will be confirmed because as senators come to know her like the president knows her, we're confident that they will recognize she will make an outstanding Supreme Court justice," McClellan said....
By Fred Barbash | October 24, 2005; 11:18 AM ET | Comments (8)
Dobson Likely to Be Summoned
Charles Babington reports in Monday's Washington Post: The Senate Judiciary Committee is likely to summon a leading conservative Christian to explain the private assurances he says he received from the White House about Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, the committee's chairman said yesterday....
By Fred Barbash | October 23, 2005; 08:32 PM ET | Comments (13)
Specter, Feinstein on 'Face the Nation'
Excerpts from CBS's "Face the Nation" with host Bob Schieffer and guests Sens. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), members of the Senate Judiciary Committee: Well, Senator Specter, you are the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Let me just put it to you, how much trouble do you think this nomination is in now? SPECTER: I don't think the nomination is in trouble. I believe the that critical part's going to be when she testifies before the committee. We have a Constitution. People ought to follow it. Instead of having all of this prejudgment. Even if you are charged with a crime, you have a right to be heard. And the constitution leaves it up to the Senate. And we're going to have hearings, and Ms. Miers will have a full and fair opportunity to present herself. She has a very, very strong record as a civil lawyer. As...
By Fred Barbash | October 23, 2005; 12:30 PM ET | Comments (7)
Knight Ridder Report on Miers Land Transaction
AP reports: Texas officials paid Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' family more than $100,000 for a small piece of land in 2000 - 10 times the land's worth - despite the state's objections to the way the price was determined, Knight Ridder Newspapers reported Saturday. The three-member committee that determined the price included Peggy Lundy, a friend of Miers, and property-rights activist Cathie Adams, Knight Ridder reported. They were appointed to the panel by state District Judge David Evans, who had received at least $5,000 in campaign contributions from Miers' law firm....
By Fred Barbash | October 22, 2005; 09:53 PM ET | Comments (2)
Cornyn vs. Specter
David D. Kirkpatrick writes in the NYT: Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican on the Judiciary Committee and a former judge, took exception on Friday to comments by Senator Arlen Specter, the committee chairman, that Harriet E. Miers, the Supreme Court nominee, needed a "crash course on constitutional law."...
By Fred Barbash | October 21, 2005; 09:57 PM ET | Comments (2)
Brownback: Hearings Will Be 'Tough for Her'
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), in an interview with Fox News' Britt Hume, says he asked Miers about Griswold and the right to privacy it established. His comments are confusing, but he seems to be saying that he got the impression, at least, that she considers the privacy doctrine in Griswold "not settled." There's some suggestion that she may have given this answer as a reason not to answer a question about Griswold, but in the course of doing so, she did indeed answer -- perhaps inadvertently. "I did talk with her about Griswold," Brownback says. "... She looked at it as the factual setting of Griswold is unlikely to come back up. But the legal issue, I interpreted from what she was saying, is not a settled doctrine." Later, on the same subject, Brownback says " I don't know what particularly she is saying.... " Recall now that Sen. Arlen...
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 08:23 PM ET | Comments (2)
Nomination Stalled
Jesse J. Holland of AP reports:The Senate may find it tough to meet President Bush's timetable to confirm Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, with lawmakers complaining anew Thursday about incomplete answers to their questions and demanding more information about her work for the president. The White House wants her confirmed by Thanksgiving, and senators plan to begin her Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings on Nov. 7. But problems like Miers' failing to mention on her Senate questionnaire that her Texas law license had been temporarily suspended -- and her being criticized by the committee's two top senators for incomplete answers on a questionnaire -- keep popping up, making it unlikely the Senate will rush her nomination through. "I would say that to this point Ms. Miers' efforts to win support have not been successful," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a member of the Judiciary Committee. "I think that those of us...
By Fred Barbash | October 20, 2005; 06:04 PM ET | Comments (1)
Bush Looking for a 'Fresh Outlook' on the Court
At a brief White House news conference today, President Bush was asked about the criticism of the Miers nomination process voiced yesterday by Sens. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). Bush acknowledged that it was an "unusual nomination because she's never been a judge." But he said that was one of the reasons he chose Miers. "I thought it made a lot of sense to bring a fresh outlook of somebody who has actually been a very successful attorney." He also said Miers would address issues about the Senate's questionnaire that were raised by Specter and Leahy....
By Lexie Verdon | October 20, 2005; 01:30 PM ET | Comments (41)
Miers Also Failed to Pay Bar Dues in Texas
Harriet Miers has reported a second incident in which she failed to pay Bar dues, resulting in a short suspension. Miers, in a letter to Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), said her Texas Bar license was "administratively suspended" for several weeks in 1989 due to late payment of her bar dues. The suspension, she said, was lifted as soon as her dues were received, she told Leahy. "I understand I was restored to former status" then, she wrote. This is the second reported incident of failure to pay bar dues. On her questionnaire submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Miers noted that she had a similar problem with theD.C. Bar. In her letter to Leahy, she also said she neglected to list her affiliation with two entities, specifically, she was a director and shareholder of Priority Enterprises from 1983 to 2000, which she descried as a "for-profit consulting and personnel placement...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 07:14 PM ET | Comments (25)
Specter-Leahy letter to Miers
Click here to see the letter sent by Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) to Harriet Miers requesting more information than she provided in her initial responses to the Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire. Among the requests: Please explain in greater detail exactly when, and under what circumstances, you were suspended from the D.C. Bar for non-payment of dues. Include any documentation, notices from the Bar, cancelled checks, or correspondence, which would help us understand the facts and circumstances of your suspension. Also inform the Committee whether, during the time of your suspension, you appeared in any courts in the District of Columbia. In answer to question 17, you explained that as Counsel to the President you are regularly faced with issues involving constitutional questions, but gave us no specifics about the issues themselves, or the work that you personally did. Please provide the Committee with details concerning the...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 06:59 PM ET | Comments (3)
Specter, Leahy Excerpts
Sens. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) and Arlen Specter (Pa.), the ranking Democrat and the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, respectively, held a news conference this afternoon. Here are some excerpts on the subject of HEM's responsiveness. Q Senator Leahy, are you insulted personally by her lack of responsiveness? SEN. LEAHY: I have seen an incomplete questionnaire. We've sent out -- I thought -- a very good questionnaire. I was satisfied with the questionnaire that went out. Democrats and Republicans on the committee -- and you know this is a committee that goes across the political spectrum -- were satisfied with it. I don't know of anybody who would tell you in that committee, that they were satisfied with the responses. So I would describe myself as unsatisfied, and I have to be satisfied before I'll vote for anybody, Republican or Democrat....
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 04:10 PM ET | Comments (3)
Specter, Leahy: HEM Responses Incomplete
Reuters reports: U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers was asked by the top Republican and Democrat on the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday to clarify some of the answers she provided this week in a questionnaire their panel sent to her. At a news conference, Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, ranking Democrat, described many of her written responses as "incomplete" and "insufficient." "Please prepare a supplement to your responses" in a number of areas "with as much detail, particularity and precision as possible," they wrote in a letter to Miers. Specter also announced that despite complaints by some Democrats that more time was needed to evaluate Miers her confirmation hearing will begin Nov. 7....
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 04:04 PM ET | Email a Comment
Report: Hearings to Start Nov. 7
Reuters reports: Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' confirmation hearings will begin on Nov. 7, congressional aides said Wednesday. Though at least some Democrats had sought more time before the proceedings begin, Sen. Arlen Specter, the Judiciary Committee Chairman and a Pennsylvania Republican, decided to start the hearings on Nov. 7 and plans to announce it later on Wednesday, aides said. The Republicans' goal is to have a confirmation vote by the full Republican-led Senate before the Nov. 24 Thanksgiving Day holiday. But Democrats may try to push that back if they believe more time is needed to evaluate President Bush's nominee to the nation's highest court, aides said....
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 10:16 AM ET | Email a Comment
Seattle PI Urges Miers Withdrawal
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer says in an editorial today that "President Bush should withdraw the nomination of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court."...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 10:12 AM ET | Comments (3)
Leahy on Miers 'Lack of Responsiveness'
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has issued the following statement regarding Harriet Miers's answers to the committee's questions:"These answers do not help the Senate much in reaching an informed decision about this nomination. In order to conduct a fair and thorough review, the Senate needs information about Ms. Miers, including her experience, her judgment, her views on the Constitution, and her independence. So far, these answers heighten, rather than lessen, concerns about whether, as a Supreme Court justice, she would be able to maintain independence from this administration and future administrations. Lack of responsiveness only adds to the burden she will have in the hearings."...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 10:03 AM ET | Email a Comment
PFAW's Neas Seeks Hearing Delay
People for the American Way has issued the following press release:Following news reports that the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court candidate Harriet Miers will begin November 7th, only five weeks after her nomination, People For the American Way President Ralph G. Neas issued the following statement: "It's wrong to rush a hearing on this nominee for a lifetime appointment. The Senate and the American people need more time to assess a candidate who is so little known, who has never served as a judge, and whose answers to the Senate's written questionnaire were as illuminating as a 25-watt bulb. Her role as President Bush's personal lawyer, and as an influential voice in critical White House decisions over the past four years must be examined closely to see whether she can make the fair and independent judgments required of the Supreme Court. "Justice O'Connor has graciously agreed to serve until...
By Fred Barbash | October 19, 2005; 09:52 AM ET | Comments (1)
Miers Questionnaire
Click here for the questionnaire submitted by Harriet Miers to the Senate Judiciary Committee....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 11:20 AM ET | Comments (5)
Miers Backed Abortion Ban
Jesse J. Holland of AP reports:Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers pledged support in 1989 for a constitutional amendment banning abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother, according to material given to the Senate on Tuesday. "If Congress passes a Human Life Amendment to the Constitution that would prohibit abortion except when it was necessary to prevent the death of the mother, would you actively support its ratification by the Texas Legislature," asked an April 1989 questionnaire sent out by the Texans United for Life group. Miers checked "yes" to that question, and all of the group's questions, including whether she would oppose the use of public moneys for abortions and whether she would use her influence to keep "pro-abortion" people off city health boards and commissions. The survey was part of the material sent to the Senate with Miers' Supreme Court questionnaire, according to two sources,...
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 11:03 AM ET | Comments (14)
Harriet Miers Financial Disclosure Available
Click here and here for the completed financial disclosure forms submitted by HEM to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Questionnaire will be available shortly....
By Fred Barbash | October 18, 2005; 10:28 AM ET | Email a Comment
GOP Wants Hearings to Start Nov. 7
David Espo of the AP reports:Senate Republicans hope to begin confirmation hearings on Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers the week of November 7, officials said Monday as President Bush sought to bolster support for her troubled appointment. Officials in both parties said Republicans have proposed a schedule for Miers' confirmation process that calls for a vote in the full Senate before Thanksgiving. It was not clear whether Democrats would agree or seek changes. Miers arranged personal meetings during the day with Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Dianne Feinstein of California. Both are members of the Judiciary Committee, which will hold hearings and take the first vote on the nomination....
By Fred Barbash | October 17, 2005; 12:19 PM ET | Comments (4)
Rice on Miers
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was asked about Miers by Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday": WALLACE: Another new subject. I know that you're a close friend of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, who's come under fire from conservatives in the last couple of weeks as an unqualified crony. Laura Bush said this week that she believed it's possible that sexism was behind some of these attacks. What do you think? RICE: I know Harriet Miers very well, worked with her now for five years. She is a woman with extraordinary integrity and talent. She is the kind of person who if there have been four arguments given, Harriet's going to look for the fifth. She's got a very probing mind and a probing intellect. And I think the problem is that people haven't gotten to know her. I think that when they get to know her in the...
By Fred Barbash | October 16, 2005; 10:48 AM ET | Comments (13)
Scott McClellan on Bush's Miers Comments
After Bush's comments (see previous post), White House spokesman Scott McClellan was questioned repeatedly by reporters. Here is an excerpt: QUESTION: ... When you say that Ms. Miers understands that religion has no role in the business of the court -- at the same time, the president has said he knows her heart, her beliefs, her character, talked today about people wanting to know about her life and, therefore, her religion -- how are we not to interpret that her religion was one of the factors in her selection? MCCLELLAN: The president makes selections based on the potential nominee's qualifications and experience and judicial temperament. That is what he has done in each and every instance when it comes to appointing people to the bench. He has a long track record of appointing people who have a conservative judicial philosophy, one that is based on interpreting our Constitution and our...
By Fred Barbash | October 12, 2005; 02:41 PM ET | Comments (6)
Bush on Miers's Religion
President Bush today again sought to quell the controversy about his newest choice for the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers; but he may have created some new questions by referring to her religion as something people "want to know...." Here is the excerpt from a brief question-and-answer period at the White House: QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. Why do people in this White House feel it is necessary to tell your supporters that Harriet Miers attends a very conservative Christian church? Is that your strategy to repair the divide that has developed among conservatives over her nomination? BUSH: People are interested to know why I picked Harriet Miers. They want to know Harriet Miers' background. They want to know as much as they possibly can before they form opinions. Part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion. Part of it has to do with the fact that she was a pioneer...
By Lexie Verdon | October 12, 2005; 12:45 PM ET | Comments (40)
What Dobson Could Not Reveal...Revealed
In an advance transcript of his radio broadcast scheduled for Wednesday, James Dobson, of the Family Research Council, says that before the nomination was announced, Karl Rove tipped him to it and informed him Miers was from "a very conservative church which is almost universally pro-lfe." Dobson says he did not explicitly discuss Miers's views on Roe v. Wade with Rove. Dobson says Rove told him that some administration candidates for the court had taken themselves off the short list because they did not want to go through the confirmation process. Dobson says he is now free to talk "because Karl Rove has now given me permission to go public with our conversation."What did Karl Rove say to me that I knew on Monday that I couldn't reveal? Well, it's what we all know now, that Harriet Miers is an Evangelical Christian, that she is from a...
By Fred Barbash | October 11, 2005; 07:45 PM ET | Comments (10)
Specter: Hearings in a Month
From the AP:Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter said Tuesday he hopes to start the confirmation hearing on Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers within a month and to wrap it up within a week. The nomination has drawn growing criticism from conservatives who say Miers lacks proven conservative credentials and a judicial background. Specter, in an interview with reporters and editors from The Associated Press, said Miers' professional qualifications are excellent but that she lacks experience in the area of constitutional law. "The hearings will be focused on how she approaches constitutional issues, her capacity to handle them," the Pennsylvania Republican said. Asked if President Bush had chosen the best candidate, the senator said: "He has picked a candidate and our job is to determine not whether she's the best qualified, but whether she's qualified." The president nominated Miers, his White House counsel, to succeed retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on...
By Fred Barbash | October 11, 2005; 05:57 PM ET | Comments (1)
Laura Bush on Harriet Miers
Joining her husband in defense of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, Laura Bush today called her a "role model for young women around the country" and suggested that sexism was a "possible" reason for the heavy criticism of the nomination. "I know Harriet well," the first lady said. "I know how accomplished she is. I know how many times she's broken the glass ceiling.... She's very deliberate and thoughtful and will bring dignity to wherever she goes, certainly the Supreme Court." The president and Laura Bush commented on Miers during an appearance on NBC's "Today Show" from Covington, La., where they participated in a home-building project with Habitat for Humanity volunteers. Asked by host Matt Lauer if sexism might be playing a role in the Miers controversy, she said, "It's possible. I think that's possible.... I think people are not looking at her accomplishments."...
By Fred Barbash | October 11, 2005; 08:10 AM ET | Comments (39)
NYT Editorial
NYT Editorial:The nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court has turned the usual partisan debate about judicial nominations inside out. Republicans have insisted for nearly five years that the president should have broad discretion in choosing judges. Now, charter members of the hurry-up-and-confirm-them crowd, like Senators Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, and Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi, are already talking about voting no, even before Ms. Miers's confirmation hearings have begun.... If Ms. Miers's nomination has caused Republicans to suddenly acquire standards, it may be causing Democrats to forget theirs. Many appear to have calculated that Ms. Miers would be a more moderate justice than anyone the Bush administration would nominate if she were defeated. Perhaps as a result, Senate Democrats have been remarkably restrained about criticizing Ms. Miers's close ties to the president and the thinness of her résumé....
By Fred Barbash | October 11, 2005; 03:07 AM ET | Comments (3)
Dobson to Talk About Secret Info
From the GJ Sentinel:COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. -- Focus on the Family founder James Dobson plans to talk about the information he has been given about Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers on two of his radio shows this week, the organization said Monday. Dobson, founder of the Colorado Springs-based Christian ministry, endorsed Miers last week, partly because of a discussion he had had with President Bush's political adviser, Karl Rove. Dobson didn't disclose that information, touching off criticism from some senators who said they had a right to have that same information. Sen. Arlen Specter and the Senate Judiciary Committee's top Democrat, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, have been considering having Dobson testify at Miers' confirmation hearings. Dobson plans to talk about the information in his broadcasts on Wednesday and Thursday. "Dr. Dobson is being deluged by requests from national media to talk about Harriet Miers and talk about what Karl Rove...
By Fred Barbash | October 11, 2005; 03:03 AM ET | Comments (2)
Texas records on Miers
AP reporting from Austin, Tx: Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, who once owned a .45-caliber revolver, is not licensed to carry a concealed handgun in Texas. State officials refused Monday to reveal whether she has ever been licensed....
By Fred Barbash | October 10, 2005; 08:08 PM ET | Comments (7)
Hecht, Graham, Bauer on 'Fox News Sunday'
Judge Nathan Hecht, a Miers friend, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) of the Judiciary Committee and social conservative Gary Bauer appeared on "Fox News Sunday." Here are some excerpts: WALLACE: Let's start with some advice that Senator Graham had for critical conservatives after he met with Harriet Miers this week. Let's watch. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) GRAHAM: Just shut up for a few minutes and just give the lady a chance to find out who she is. You know, people are not really -- people want their 15 minutes of fame. This ain't about Harriet. It's about them. (END VIDEO CLIP) WALLACE: Gary Bauer, is this all about wanting your 15 minutes of fame, and are you going to take the advice from Senator Graham and shut up? BAUER: Well, again, in all due respect to my friend Senator Graham, give me a break. I mean, talking about 15 minutes of...
By Fred Barbash | October 9, 2005; 10:25 AM ET | Comments (2)
Specter, Leahy Excerpts: ABC
Excerpts from comments by Sens. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the chairman and the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, appearing on ABC this morning. Among the highlights: Specter says there's a "lynch mob" on the Miers nomination; Leahy says Miers did mention Warren Burger as a favorite justice but does not recall her saying, simply, "Warren"; questions raised about completing the confirmation process by Thanksgiving; questions raised about executive privilege. (George) STEPHANOPOULOS: And, Senator Specter, let me begin with you. And I want to begin with a yes/no question. President Bush said when he chose Harriet Miers that she was the best-qualified person he could find for the Supreme Court. Do you agree? SPECTER: Well, I think she may well turn out to be the best- qualified person he could find once we give her a chance to be heard. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, sir, excuse me, that...
By Fred Barbash | October 9, 2005; 10:09 AM ET | Comments (3)
Specter on Miers
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Sunday he plans to vigorously question Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers about her qualifications because she has not proved to him she can handle the weighty issues that come before the high court. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he has questions about Miers' grasp of privacy and abortion law. Miers, a corporate lawyer from Texas, is now White House counsel and has never served as a judge....
By Fred Barbash | October 9, 2005; 09:59 AM ET | Comments (1)
Bush Pushes for Miers in Radio Address
In his weekly radio address today, President Bush again praised Harriet Miers. He told listeners, "I chose Harriet Miers for the Court both because of her accomplishments, and because I know her character and her judicial philosophy. Harriet Miers will be the type of judge I said I would nominate: a good conservative judge." The entire text of the address can be found here at the White House Web site. ...
By Lexie Verdon | October 8, 2005; 12:07 PM ET | Comments (4)
Bush: She Will Be Confirmed
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush Friday predicted White House lawyer Harriet Miers would be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court despite a chorus of criticism from conservatives and some calls for him to withdraw her nomination. Asked if he planned to withdraw Miers' nomination, which must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate, Bush said: "She's going to be on the bench. She'll be confirmed and when she is on the bench, people will see a fantastic woman who is honest, open, humble and capable of being a great Supreme Court judge." Since nominating her for a lifetime appointment on the highest U.S. court, Bush has faced criticism from conservatives within his own Republican Party for not picking an experienced judge with clear-cut conservative credentials who would firmly move the court to the right....
By Fred Barbash | October 7, 2005; 11:34 AM ET | Comments (14)
Group of 14 Meeting on Miers
washingtonpost.com's Chris Cillizza is reporting on his blog, "The Fix," that the bipartisan group of 14 senators who averted a showdown over President Bush's judicial nominees earlier this year is planning to meet later today to discuss Miers's nomination. You can see his posting here....
By Lexie Verdon | October 5, 2005; 02:17 PM ET | Comments (1)
Bush Defends Miers Appointment
Click here for transcript of President's news conference. President Bush, responding to critical questions about his appointment of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, said he is confident she shares his judicial philosophy now and that she will continue to share it over the next 20 years. Asked by a reporter if she was "the most qualified" person he could find in the United States, he said, "yes, otherwise i would not have" named her. "She knows the kind of judge I'm looking for," Bush said, speaking at a morning news conference, noting that she had helped him conduct the search that led to the appointment of Chief Justice John G. Roberts. Jr.. Reporters noted several times that a number of conservative commentators had questioned passing over some of the more prominent, proven conservative judges in favor of Miers. ...
By Fred Barbash | October 4, 2005; 10:50 AM ET | Comments (7)
Miers Appointment: Reid Reaction
Statement from Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.): "I like Harriet Miers. As White House Counsel, she has worked with me in a courteous and professional manner. I am also impressed with the fact that she was a trailblazer for women as managing partner of a major Dallas law firm and as the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association. "In my view, the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer. The current justices have all been chosen from the lower federal courts. A nominee with relevant non-judicial experience would bring a different and useful perspective to the Court. "I look forward to the Judiciary Committee process which will help the American people learn more about Harriet Miers, and help the Senate determine whether she deserves a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court."...
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 11:45 AM ET | Comments (7)
Hatch, Kohl, Reaction
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued this statement: "Harriett Miers will bring diversity and depth to the Court," Hatch said. "She has broad professional experience that will provide a fresh perspective from outside the insular walls of the judiciary. As White House Counsel, she has been overseeing the process of choosing judges who will interpret, but not make, the law. Throughout her life, she has been dedicated to the law and has always set an example of integrity, accomplishment and service. It's important that we don't prejudge the nominee; I hope the Senate again shows the American people that we can conduct a dignified and thorough confirmation process." Sen. Herbert Kohl (D-Wis.) issued this statement: The President has nominated White House Counsel Harriet Miers to replace Judge Sandra Day O'Connor as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. I look forward to meeting with Ms....
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 10:59 AM ET | Comments (11)
Miers Appointment: Alliance for Justice Reaction
Statement from the Alliance for Justice: "With Harriet Miers, President Bush has opted for a nominee whose judicial philosophy is unknown to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who, while conservative, often cast a decisive swing vote to preserve important rights and freedoms," said Nan Aron, president of Alliance for Justice. "Harriet Miers has spent the better part of her legal career in corporate practice. For the past dozen years, she has served President Bush in numerous capacities. She has been his personal lawyer and his lawyer when he was running for governor of Texas, and has received several government appointments from him, including White House counsel, White House staff secretary, deputy White House chief of staff for domestic policy and Texas state lottery commissioner. The president undoubtedly chose her because she has been his long-time confidant."...
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 10:48 AM ET | Email a Comment
Miers Contributed Money to Bush ... and Gore
According to Political Money Line, Supreme Court nominee Miers gave money to Sen. Gore's presidential campaign in 1988 as well as to the Democratic National Committee....
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 10:43 AM ET | Comments (11)
Miers Appointment: NARAL Reaction
Here is a statement from NARAL Pro-Choice America: "The burden is on the Bush administration and Harriet Miers to prove to the American people that she will respect and protect our fundamental freedoms, including a woman's right to choose. Miers does not appear to have a public record to assure America's pro-choice majority that she is a moderate in the tradition of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who was the critical swing vote that protected women's reproductive health and freedom. The president has known Miers for many years, so it's incumbent upon his administration and this nominee to share with the American public her views on critical issues, including the right to privacy," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America....
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 10:30 AM ET | Comments (25)
Miers Appointment: Frist Reaction
Here's a statement from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.):"This morning, after a bipartisan and inclusive consultation process, President Bush nominated Harriet Miers as Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. With this selection, the president has chosen another outstanding nominee to sit on our nation's highest court. "Ms. Miers is honest and hard working and understands the importance of judicial restraint and the limited role of a judge to interpret the law and not legislate from the bench. She has extensive legal experience ranging from private practice to Counsel to the President and was the first woman to serve as president of the Dallas Bar Association and the State Bar of Texas."...
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 09:57 AM ET | Comments (1)
Miers Appointment: Leahy Reaction
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, has issued the following statement on the appointment of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court:The stakes for the American people could not be higher with this new nomination to the Supreme Court. Justice O'Connor brought an open mind to the cases she reviewed and served as a moderating influence on the Court. The person who replaces her replaces a pivotal vote on our Nation's most powerful court. The person who replaces her has the potential to dramatically tilt the balance of the court. Maintaining the stability of the court is crucial for the Nation and will be a factor for me as I consider this nomination. It is too early to reach any firm judgment about such an important nomination. I do not know Ms. Miers well and I did not meet her until recently, six months after she...
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 09:42 AM ET | Comments (13)
Miers Appointment: Schumer Reaction
Statement from Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers for Justice O'Connor's seat on the Supreme Court: "We know even less about Harriet Miers than we did about John Roberts and because this is the critical swing seat on the Court, Americans will need to know a lot more about Mier's judicial philosophy and legal background before any vote for confirmation."...
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 09:32 AM ET | Comments (7)
Reaction to Miers: Cornyn
Sen. Cornyn (R-Tex.) gets the prize for first statement in reaction to the Miers appointment. This was released before the announcement. Second place goes to Progress for America, which had a Web site ready to go in her support. Here is the Cornyn statement: "The President will soon announce his nominee to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court of the United States: Harriet Miers, currently serving as White House Counsel. As he did with Judge John G. Roberts, Jr., the President has chosen an outstanding nominee for our nation's highest court. The Senate should consider this nomination in both a thorough and expedient manner....
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 08:59 AM ET | Comments (31)
Bush Statement on Harriet Miers
Here are excerpts from the president's announcement.In our great democracy, the Supreme Court is the guardian of our constitutional freedoms and the protector of our founding promise of equal justice under the law. Over the past five years I've spoken clearly to the American people about the qualities I look for in a Supreme Court justice. A justice must be a person of accomplishment and sound legal judgment. A justice must be a person of fairness and unparalleled integrity. And a justice must strictly apply the Constitution and laws of the United States and not legislate from the bench. This summer, I nominated an individual to the high court who embodies all these characteristics. And this morning, our nation can be proud when John Roberts opens a new Supreme Court session as the 17th chief justice of the United States. It is now my duty to select a nominee to...
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 08:38 AM ET | Comments (27)
Bush Names Harriet Miers to Supreme Court
Bush announced that his White House counsel and former personal attorney would be nominated to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor....
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 08:09 AM ET | Comments (17)
White House Releases Profile of Harriet Miers
With the president said ready to appoint Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, the White House this morning released this bio sheet on her.Harriet Miers Biography Harriet Miers was born in Dallas, Texas on August 10, 1945. Ms. Miers received her bachelor's degree in Mathematics in 1967 and J.D. in 1970 from Southern Methodist University. Upon graduation, she clerked for U.S. District Judge Joe E. Estes from 1970 to 1972. In 1972, Ms. Miers became the first woman hired at Dallas's Locke Purnell Rain Harrell. In March 1996, her colleagues elected her the first female President of Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell, at that time a firm of about 200 lawyers. She became the first female to lead a Texas firm of that size. Locke, Purnell eventually merged with a Houston firm and became Locke Liddell & Sapp, LLP, where Ms. Miers became Co-Managing Partner and helped manage an...
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 07:50 AM ET | Comments (23)
Unconfirmed Reports: Harriet Miers Is Nominee
Wire services and networks are reporting that President Bush will appoint Harriet Miers, White House counsel, to the Supreme Court and will make the announcement at 8 a.m. today. Here is a profile of Miers written in June by Post White House correspondent Michael A. Fletcher. Quiet but Ambitious White House Counsel Makes Life of Law Michael A. Fletcher Ask White House counsel Harriet Miers when she first met George W. Bush, and she is less than specific. "I met him on a variety of occasions over the course of time," she replied recently, explaining their long-ago encounters in the social and power corridors of Texas. "But not in a memorable way." Ask her what it was like to be the first woman elected president of the Texas Bar Association, and she invokes not gender, but the geographic rivalry that frequently underlies bar elections in the state. "It was a...
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 07:11 AM ET | Comments (1)
Reports: Bush to Announce SCOTUS choice at 8 a.m.
Washington Post White House correspondent Peter Baker reports that the president has scheduled his announcement of a replacement for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor for 8 this morning. Stay tuned....
By Fred Barbash | October 3, 2005; 06:50 AM ET | Comments (1)
McClellan Says No Court Nomination Today
The Reuters news service reports: President Bush Friday completed consultations with the Senate on whom he should nominate to a Supreme Court vacancy and is close to making an announcement, the White House said. Spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush would not announce his choice to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the high court on Friday. He left open the possibility that the announcement could come next week....
By Lexie Verdon | September 30, 2005; 11:17 AM ET | Comments (3)
Roberts Is Sworn In
John Roberts was sworn in as the nation's 17th chief justice shortly after 3 p.m. today in the East Room of the White House. John Paul Stevens, the senior associate justice, administered the oath. Watch video of the Roberts swearing in ceremony below: var movieSrc = "http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/mmedia/player/player.swf?whichMode=normal&justify=left&playad=no&mediatype=stream&postdir=nation&postvideo=092905-6v&cuesfile=none&autoplay=no&starttime=0&endtime=0&largerver=none&image=none" ; //URL OF WHERE .SWF MOVIE IS PUBLISHED var movieWidth = "454" ; //FLASH MOVIE AND BACK-UP GRAPHIC WIDTH var movieHeight = "275" ; //FLASH MOVIE AND BACK-UP GRAPHIC HEIGHT var backupGraphic = "no" ; // If you have a backup graphic "yes" or "no" var graphicSrc = "" ; var graphicLink = "" ; //requiredVersion: Change this to 8 to test your alternate text. var requiredVersion = 7; // version the user needs to view site (max is 7, min is 2) var useRedirect = false; // "true" loads new flash or non-flash page into browser // "false" embeds movie or alternate...
By Lexie Verdon | September 29, 2005; 03:12 PM ET | Comments (3)
Roll Call on Roberts Confirmation
The 78-22 roll call by which the Senate voted to confirm John Roberts as the 17th chief justice of the United States. On this vote, a "yes" vote was a vote to confirm Roberts and a "no" vote was a vote to oppose his nomination. Voting "yes" were 22 Democrats, 55 Republicans and one independent. Voting "no" were 22 Democrats. Democrats Yes Baucus, Mont.; Bingaman, N.M.; Byrd, W.Va.; Carper, Del.; Conrad, N.D.; Dodd, Conn.; Dorgan, N.D.; Feingold, Wis.; Johnson, S.D.; Kohl, Wis.; Landrieu, La.; Leahy, Vt.; Levin, Mich.; Lieberman, Conn.; Lincoln, Ark.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Fla.; Nelson, Neb.; Pryor, Ark.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Salazar, Colo.; Wyden, Ore. Democrats No Akaka, Hawaii; Bayh, Ind.; Biden, Del.; Boxer, Calif.; Cantwell, Wash.; Clinton, N.Y.; Corzine, N.J.; Dayton, Minn.; Durbin, Ill.; Feinstein, Calif.; Harkin, Iowa; Inouye, Hawaii; Kennedy, Mass.; Kerry, Mass.; Lautenberg, N.J.; Mikulski, Md.; Obama, Ill.; Reed, R.I.; Reid, Nev.; Sarbanes, Md.; Schumer,...
By Fred Barbash | September 29, 2005; 12:31 PM ET | Comments (20)
Roberts Confirmed, 78-22
The Senate has confirmed Roberts....
By Fred Barbash | September 29, 2005; 11:42 AM ET | Comments (51)
Senate Is Voting on Confirmation
The vote has begun on the Roberts nomination.....
By Fred Barbash | September 29, 2005; 11:32 AM ET | Email a Comment
Confirmation Expected Today
The Senate is reportedly set to confirm John Roberts as chief justice of the United States this morning, with a vote as early as 11:30. See this report. Sen. Jim Jeffords (I-Vt.) will vote aye, according to this story. Roberts is set to be sworn in today, according to Gina Holland, Associated Press: The White House was making plans for a swearing in ceremony in the East Room on Thursday, attended by President Bush. A separate event would be held at the Supreme Court, possibly on Monday, as the Supreme Court begins its nine-month term. Officials were unable to say late Wednesday who would administer either oath. Although there is one, combined oath that can be administered, justices usually take two -- once pledging to uphold the Constitution, then to fairly judge the rich and the poor. Over the past two decades, justices generally have...
By Fred Barbash | September 29, 2005; 06:37 AM ET | Comments (5)
Vote Count
From the Associated Press: All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote to confirm John Roberts as chief justice of the United States. The 44 Senate Democrats are less unified, and independent James Jeffords of Vermont has not announced his position. Democrats who have announced their support for Roberts (13): Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Bill Nelson of Florida, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Ken Salazar of Colorado. Democrats who have announced their opposition (16): Evan Bayh of Indiana, Joseph Biden of Delaware, Barbara Boxer of California, Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Jon Corzine of New Jersey, Mark Dayton of Minnesota, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Dianne Feinstein of California, Edward...
By Fred Barbash | September 27, 2005; 08:14 AM ET | Comments (3)
Vote Count
The nomination of John Roberts moves to the Senate floor today. Here is the current vote count from the Associated Press:All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote for John Roberts' confirmation as Supreme Court chief justice. The 44 Democrats are less unified, and independent James Jeffords of Vermont has not given his position. Democrats who have announced their support for Roberts (12): Bill Nelson of Florida, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Max Baucus of Montana, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin and Ken Salazar of Colorado. Democrats who have announced their opposition (14): Harry Reid of Nevada, Barbara Boxer of California, John Kerry of Massachusetts, Jon Corzine of New Jersey, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Barack Obama of Illinois,...
By Fred Barbash | September 26, 2005; 03:33 AM ET | Comments (13)
Salazar: Yes
Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar says he will vote to confirm John Roberts. See the article in the Rocky Mountain News....
By Fred Barbash | September 25, 2005; 09:00 PM ET | Comments (1)
Clinton Will Vote No
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y) has announced her oppositon to confirmation of John R. Roberts to be chief justice of the United Sates. She joins New York's senior senator, Charles Schumer, in opposition. "My desire to maintain the already fragile Supreme Court majority for civil rights, voting rights and women's rights outweigh the respect I have for Judge Roberts's intellect, character, and legal skills," she said in a statement. The statement is below in full: "The nomination of Judge John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the United States is a matter of tremendous consequence for future generations of Americans. It requires thoughtful inquiry and debate, and I commend my colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee for their dedication to making sure that all questions were presented and that those outside of the Senate had the opportunity to make their voices heard. After serious and...
By Fred Barbash | September 23, 2005; 01:13 PM ET | Comments (27)
Obama Will Vote No
Illinois Sen. Barack Obama (D) announced that he will vote "no" on the Roberts confirmation. See the article in the Illinois Leader....
By Fred Barbash | September 23, 2005; 01:07 PM ET | Comments (11)
Floor Vote Count
All 55 Senate Republicans are expected to vote for John Roberts's confirmation as chief justice of the United States next week. The 44 Democrats are less unified. Vermont's Sen. James Jeffords is the one remaining independent vote. Democrats who have announced their support for Roberts (8): Bill Nelson of Florida, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Tim Johnson of South Dakota, Max Baucus of Montana, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Kent Conrad of North Dakota. Democrats who voted for Roberts on the Judiciary Committee (3): Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Herb Kohl of Wisconsin. From the Associated Press -- current Senate vote count based on announcements so far. Democrats who have announced their opposition (7): Harry Reid of Nevada, Barbara Boxer of California, John Kerry of Massachusetts, Jon Corzine of New Jersey, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Barack Obama of...
By Fred Barbash | September 23, 2005; 03:48 AM ET | Comments (4)
Coburn, Yes. Final Tally: 13-5
Final vote: Yes - 13; No - 5 Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Grassley (R), Kyl (R), DeWine (R), Sessions (R), Leahy (D), Kohl (D), Feingold (D), Graham (R), Cornyn (R), Brownback (R) Coburn (R) No: (All Democrats) Kennedy, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Durbin....
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 12:44 PM ET | Comments (10)
Cornyn, Brownback, Yes; Durbin, No
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R,) Grassley (R,) Kyl (R), DeWine (R), Sessions (R), Leahy (D), Kohl (D), Feingold (D), Graham(R), Cornyn (R), Brownback (R) No: (All Democrats) Kennedy, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Durbin. Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) introduced a girl with Downs Syndrome at the hearing to emphasize his commitment to the right to life....
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 12:41 PM ET | Comments (10)
Schumer Votes No
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Grassley (R), Kyl (R), DeWine (R), Sessions (R), Leahy (D), Kohl (D), Feingold (D) No: (All Democrats) Kennedy, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 12:23 PM ET | Comments (9)
Committee Votes to Confirm Roberts
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Grassley (R), Kyl (R), DeWine (R), Sessions (R), Leahy (D), Kohl (D), Feingold (D), Graham (R) No: (All Democrats) Kennedy, Biden, Feinstein....
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 11:52 AM ET | Comments (13)
Sessions, Yes; Feingold, Yes
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Grassley (R), Kyl (R), DeWine (R), Sessions (R), Leahy (D), Kohl (D), Feingold (D) No: (All Democrats) Kennedy, Biden, Feinstein Feingold statement below provided by his office:...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 11:38 AM ET | Comments (7)
DeWine Votes Yes; Kohl, Yes
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R) Grassley (R), Kyl (R), DeWine (R), Leahy (D), Kohl (D) No: Kennedy (D), Biden (D), Feinstein (D) Excerts from Kohl below:...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 11:25 AM ET | Email a Comment
The Dems 'No' So Far
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Leahy (D), Grassley (R), Kyl (R) No: Feinstein (D), Kennedy (D), Biden (D)...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 11:13 AM ET | Email a Comment
Biden Votes No
Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) says "it's a very close call" but votes no....
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 11:08 AM ET | Comments (5)
Kyl Votes Yes
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Leahy (D), Grassley (R), Kyl (R) No: Feinstein (D), Kennedy (D)...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 11:00 AM ET | Comments (1)
Kennedy Votes No
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Leahy (D), Grassley (R) No: Feinstein (D), Kennedy (D)...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 10:44 AM ET | Comments (15)
Grassley Votes Yes
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Leahy (D), Grassley (R) No: Feinstein (D)...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 10:36 AM ET | Email a Comment
Leahy Votes Yes
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R), Leahy (D) No: Feinstein (D) Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who announced his "aye" vote yesterday, reaffirmed his vote. "My Vermont routes have always told me to go with my conscience. [Roberts] is a man of his word. I take him at his word that he is not an ideologue."...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 10:34 AM ET | Comments (3)
Hatch Votes Yes
Vote so far: Yes: Specter (R), Hatch (R) No: Feinstein (D) Sen. Orrin Hatch (Utah) says "it's pretty tough to vote against this man if you're really being fair.... He's the best I've seen." Hatch excerpts below: ...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 10:24 AM ET | Email a Comment
Feinstein Votes No
Vote Yes: Specter (R) No: Feinstein (D) Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) cast her vote no, saying she did not like Roberts's answers to her questions and those of other senators, and particularly as "the only woman on the committee," she said she remains unconvinced that he will act as chief justice to uphold basic rights of all Americans. The committee has taken a break for a floor vote. Feinstein excerpts below:...
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 09:56 AM ET | Comments (25)
Sen. Specter Calls Committee to Order
Vote Yes-1; No-0; Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) opened proceedings at 9:32 a.m., casting his vote for Roberts....
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 09:40 AM ET | Email a Comment
Senate Judiciary Committee
I will be reporting live in this space on Senate Judiciary Committee proceedings this morning. The pre-vote speech making is set to begin momentarily....
By Fred Barbash | September 22, 2005; 09:28 AM ET | Email a Comment
Boxer Will Vote No
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) announced today that she will vote against Roberts confirmation. See her statement here. In announced opposition among Democrats now are Sens. Reid, Kennedy, Corzine, Kerry, Boxer and Lautenberg. Democrats announced in favor include Sens. Leahy, Baucus and Johnson and Bingaman....
By Fred Barbash | September 21, 2005; 08:35 PM ET | Comments (6)
Corzine Will Vote Against; Baucus and Johnson, Yes
Sen. Jon S. Corzine (D-N.J.) announced today that he will oppose the Roberts confirmation. Click herefor his full statement. Democratic Sens. Max Baucus (Mont.) and Tim Johnson (S.D.) said they would vote yes....
By Fred Barbash | September 21, 2005; 06:10 PM ET | Comments (3)
Kennedy Will Vote Against Roberts
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) announced today that he will vote against Roberts. Read his statement here....
By Fred Barbash | September 21, 2005; 11:42 AM ET | Comments (14)
Leahy Will Vote to Confirm
Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said this morning that he will vote to confirm John G. Roberts Jr. as chief justice of the United States. Click here for his statement....
By Fred Barbash | September 21, 2005; 11:06 AM ET | Comments (13)
Bush Meets on O'Connor Replacement
Steve Holland of Reuters reports: Senate leaders warned President Bush Wednesday that his next nominee to the Supreme Court will likely face a far more contentious confirmation battle than John Roberts, who is poised to become U.S. chief justice. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, emerged from a White House meeting to say he had advised the president to ask retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor to stay on through the court's coming October-June term in order to see how Roberts performs as chief justice. With the court's balance of power likely at stake, Bush is considering a number of candidates to replace O'Connor and was expected to announce his choice in the days after Roberts is confirmed by the full Senate next week....
By Fred Barbash | September 21, 2005; 09:23 AM ET | Comments (3)
Chafee Will Vote to Confirm
The AP reports: Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) says he will vote to confirm John Roberts as chief justice of the United States. Chafee told the Providence Journal that he will approve Roberts even though he has concerns the conservative judge will vote to restrict abortion rights. Chafee, a Republican, says the Supreme Court has a narrow majority that favors abortion rights and adding Roberts won't change that. Roberts would replace the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who opposed abortion. Democratic Senator Jack Reed says he has not decided how he will vote on Roberts' nomination....
By Fred Barbash | September 21, 2005; 08:12 AM ET | Comments (1)
Leahy to Announce Roberts Vote
From the Boston Globe:U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., will announce his position on the confirmation of Chief Justice-nominee John Roberts on Wednesday, his spokesman said Tuesday. Leahy is the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will vote Thursday on the Roberts nomination. The committee is made up of 10 Republicans and eight Democrats. Leahy's speech on the Senate floor Wednesday morning will follow a meeting with President Bush to discuss the next opening on the court, the seat held by retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Bush invited Leahy and the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., as well as the Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate to discuss the vacancy. "The president has said he wants to be a uniter and not a divider, and he's also said he's against judicial activism," said Leahy. "Real, two-way, bipartisan consultation is the way to achieve both...
By Fred Barbash | September 21, 2005; 06:02 AM ET | Email a Comment
Specter Will Vote to Confirm
From Reuters: The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said on Monday he will vote for John Roberts to be U.S. chief justice even though it is uncertain what the conservative appeals court judge will do on the Supreme Court. "It's my judgment that he's well qualified ... and I intend to vote aye when his nomination is called before the Senate," the Republican chairman, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, said in a Senate speech. "Notwithstanding his answers and my efforts to glean some hint or realistic expectation from his words and body language, candidly it is not possible to predict or have a solid expectation of what Judge Roberts would do," Specter said....
By Fred Barbash | September 19, 2005; 05:05 PM ET | Comments (5)
Bush Consults on Next Nominee
David Espo of the AP reports:President Bush has invited key lawmakers to a White House meeting next week to begin consultations on a replacement for retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, officials said Friday. The meeting, to be held Wednesday, signals that the White House is moving to find a successor to O'Connor as Judge John Roberts Jr. awaits confirmation as chief justice....
By Fred Barbash | September 17, 2005; 07:50 AM ET | Email a Comment
American Bar Association
Steve Tober, speaking for the American Bar Association standing committee that reviews judicial candidates, said Judge Roberts has been found unanimously to be "well qualified" to be chief justice of the United States. "He has the admiration and respect of his colleagues on and off the bench. And he is the very definition of collegial." Tober said the committee reviewed him twice, for the associate justice position and the chief justice's position....
By Fred Barbash | September 15, 2005; 11:48 AM ET | Comments (7)
FYI
Note: The Associated Press reports from San Francisco:Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools was ruled unconstitutional Wednesday by a federal judge who granted legal standing to two families represented by an atheist who lost his previous battle before the U.S. Supreme Court. U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God" violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God." Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when recited in public schools....
By Fred Barbash | September 14, 2005; 02:24 PM ET | Comments (7)
Sen. Schumer: "Pleasantly Surprised but...."
To his disappointment, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) failed in efforts to draw a strong denunciation from Roberts of some extreme statements made by televangelist Pat Roberts on the judiciary, including a comment that activist judges were more dangerous than terrorists, although Roberts said he disagreed with it and would uphold and defend the independence of the judiciary. Things got a little testy when Schumer pressed Roberts, unsuccessfully, for a statement on whether something "has to cross state lines" to trigger application of the Constitution's Commerce Clause. Schumer asked how Roberts could comment on the right to privacy embodied by Griswold v. Connecticut but not on the Commerce Clause issue of Wickard v. Filburn, a 1942 case. Roberts said the principle of Griswold was no longer being litigated while the Commerce Clause question has been before the court quite recently, in the still-pending Raich case. Schumer did say, however, that...
By Fred Barbash | September 13, 2005; 06:42 PM ET | Comments (3)
Kyl: Citation of Foreign Law
The hearing resumed at 2:16 with questions by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). Kyl's primary concern was the practice by some U.S. judges of citing foreign law in support of their decisions. He specifically mentioned last term's ruling Roper v. Simmons (invalidating the death penalty as applied to minors) where the court has cited foreign law. "It's an American constitution," said Kyle, not a British or a French or an Iranian constitution. "What," he asked Roberts, is the "role of foreign law" in interpreting the Constitution? Roberts said his concern about citations to foreign law arose when foreign law was cited as "precedent" for a decision. "If we're relying on a decision by, say a German judge," there is no accountability, he said. In "foreign law you can find anything you want," Roberts said. " ... That actually expands the discretion of...
By Fred Barbash | September 13, 2005; 02:51 PM ET | Comments (15)
Hearings Begin
John G. Roberts began answering senators' questions this morning as the hearing on his nomination to be chief justice of the Supreme Court got underway at 9:30 a.m. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) was the first questioner. Roberts acknowledged that the concept of legal precedent is a "very important consideration" when questioned about the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision....
By Lexie Verdon | September 13, 2005; 09:50 AM ET | Email a Comment
Specter: Too Soon for Gonzales
From Reuters via The Post:President George W. Bush should keep Alberto Gonzales as his attorney general rather than possibly nominate him to a seat on the Supreme Court, a top Senate Republican said on Sunday. "I believe it is a little too soon for Attorney General Gonzales to move up," Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania told NBC's "Meet the Press" program....
By Fred Barbash | September 11, 2005; 04:40 PM ET | Email a Comment
Sen. Salazar's Unanswered Questions
By M.E. Sprengelmeyer in today's Rocky Mountain News A cordial, one-hour meeting today wasn't enough to allay all of Sen. Ken Salazar's concerns about Supreme Court Chief Justice nominee John Roberts. Salazar offered some praise for President Bush's pick to replace the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist. But he also told reporters he still had unanswered questions and that he wants the White House to release more documents about Roberts' legal views....
By Fred Barbash | September 9, 2005; 06:30 PM ET | Comments (1)
The Morning Papers
Good morning. Accounts of the ceremony at the Supreme Court for Chief Justice Rehnquist can be found in The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, theChicago Tribune and the New York Times. On the upcoming hearing and the politics of the next nomination, see: Peter Baker and Jo Becker in The Post:President Bush vowed yesterday to "take a good, long look" at a "wide open" list of candidates before deciding whom to nominate for a second open seat on the Supreme Court, as both sides girded for twin confirmation battles and recalibrated strategies after the dizzying events of recent days..... At the same time, Bush playfully hinted he could choose his friend Alberto R. Gonzales, a prospect that reignited consternation among conservative groups skeptical of the attorney general's politics. Maura Reynolds in the LA Times:Senate leaders said Tuesday that the Judiciary Committee would begin hearings Monday on President...
By Fred Barbash | September 7, 2005; 07:52 AM ET | Comments (5)
Hearings Set for Monday, Sept. 12
Confirmation hearings for chief justice nominee John G. Roberts will begin Monday at noon, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said today. Specter, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he expected the hearings to be completed by the end of the week. He did not say when he expected the committee to vote on the nomination. He did express confidence that a full Senate vote on Roberts would allow him, if confirmed, to take his seat before the formal opening of the court's term, on Oct. 3. Hearings for Roberts's nomination as an associate justice were originally set for today. Specter said that even before the death of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist on Saturday, he had already received some requests for a delay so that attention could be focused on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Specter said that in postponing the hearing, the committee was deferring to the Rehnquist...
By Fred Barbash | September 6, 2005; 11:05 AM ET | Email a Comment
Supreme Court Ceremony
APWilliam H. Rehnquist's casket was carried up the steps of the Supreme Court Tuesday by former clerks including John Roberts, the man nominated to succeed him as chief justice. Official Washington began paying its last respects at the court to the nation's 16th chief justice. Roberts and the seven other pallbearers bore the casket up the marble steps of the high court to the Great Hall. Rehnquist's casket was placed on the Lincoln catafalque, the structure on which President Lincoln's coffin rested in the Rotunda of the Capitol. Lining the steps were six justices of the Supreme Court. Sandra Day O'Connor, who has announced her plans to retire, was in tears as the casket passed by. Absent were Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and David Souter....
By Fred Barbash | September 6, 2005; 10:29 AM ET | Email a Comment
Supreme Court Ceremony
APSupreme Court nominee John Roberts and other former clerks carried the casket containing William H. Rehnquist's body into the court Tuesday, where official Washington was to pay its last respects to the nation's 16th chief justice....
By Fred Barbash | September 6, 2005; 10:19 AM ET | Email a Comment
Leahy Says Hearings Not This Week
Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.), the Senate Judiciary Committee's ranking Democrat, said on CNN this morning that "we will not have the hearing this week. If anything, it would be unseemly" to begin while funeral rites for Chief Justice Rehnquist are underway. Also, "I think the Senate wants to have some attention on Katrina," he said. Asked if the hearings would be different in tone because of Roberts's nomination as chief justice, Leahy said: "What faction of the court he would join was the question" before. "Now, it's what sort of leadership" he would provide....
By Fred Barbash | September 6, 2005; 10:03 AM ET | Email a Comment
Hearings Delayed
Reuters is reporting that there will be a delay in the hearings, but there was no confirmation yet of that. Here's the dispatch:U.S. Senate leaders agreed Monday to briefly delay the start of U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' confirmation hearing, which had been set to begin Tuesday, a Republican official said. The official said the hearing would now begin as early as Thursday and no later than next Monday, with a final decision on timing expected following further discussions....
By Fred Barbash | September 5, 2005; 11:35 AM ET | Comments (4)
John Roberts Nominated As Chief Justice
President Bush said this morning he would nominate John G. Roberts as chief justice of the United States. Bush made the announcement at an 8 a.m. Oval Office appearance. Roberts would replace Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, for whom he clerked. For complete biographical details on Roberts as well as key documents, click here. The situation is unprecedented. Bush said he would soon name a new associate justice nominee to replace Roberts, who had been named to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. O'Connor has made her resignation effective with the confirmation of her successor. The Senate will have to confirm Roberts as chief justice. It was unclear whether the confirmation hearings set to begin tomorrow will be postponed, or converted into a hearing for chief justice. "Judge Roberts has earned the nation's confidence, and I'm pleased to announce that I will nominate him to serve as the 17th chief...
By Fred Barbash | September 5, 2005; 08:04 AM ET | Comments (12)
Tributes to Rehnquist
"He steered the court along a path of responsibility and careful analysis throughout his 19 years as chief justice. He led the court with firm principles but with a light touch." -- retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. "We will miss him deeply as a friend and as a colleague. He was a good man who epitomized fairness, dignity and strength of character." -- Justice Clarence Thomas "A plain speaker without airs of affectations, the chief fostered a spirit of collegiality among the nine of us perhaps unparalleled in the court's history." -- Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. "Chief Justice Rehnquist restored sanity to our criminal justice system, respect for our nation's allocation of power between the states and the federal government, and freedom in the public square to people of faith." -- Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Judiciary Committee member. "He administered the court, as he did the judicial system, effectively and...
By Fred Barbash | September 4, 2005; 05:20 PM ET | Comments (3)
Chief Justice Roberts?
Deb Riechmann of the AP writes:Among President Bush's options for filling the Supreme Court vacancy left by the death of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist is renominating John Roberts for the top chair. Bush picked Roberts to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, but with a little paper shuffling, he could withdraw that nomination and resubmit Roberts's name to fill Rehnquist's seat instead. While that is only one of the president's choices, some legal experts who talk regularly with the White House say Bush might do just that. They say naming Roberts for chief justice might be the only way to ensure all nine seats on the court are filled when it begins its next term Oct. 3....
By Fred Barbash | September 4, 2005; 05:17 PM ET | Comments (3)
Reuters: Dueling Interest Groups
Thomas Ferraro of Reuters reports: Dueling special interest groups stepped up their respective efforts Tuesday in the battle over U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, whose U.S. Senate confirmation hearing begins next week. Progress for America, a conservative organization, unveiled a $400,000, nationwide television ad campaign, set to begin on Wednesday, in support of President Bush's nomination of Roberts, while the liberal Alliance for Justice announced its opposition. In a 105-page report, the alliance blasted Roberts, based largely on a review of thousands of pages of documents from his days as a lawyer in the Reagan administration two decades ago. "Judge Roberts' consistent record suggests that he would limit Congress' longstanding ability to address nationwide problems, restrict the court's historic authority to vindicate individual rights and legal protections, expand the powers of the president and law enforcement and lower the wall separating church and state," the group said. Chris...
By Fred Barbash | August 30, 2005; 04:36 PM ET | Comments (7)
Roberts Documents
From today's documents, Bloomberg news reports:As a young government lawyer, Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. proposed reining in the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission because its civil rights positions were "totally inconsistent" with President Ronald W. Reagan's policies, a newly released memo says....
By Fred Barbash | August 29, 2005; 03:00 PM ET | Comments (3)
Press Release: Americans United
Americans United for Separation of Church and State has published a report critical of JR's positions on church-state issues of interest. Read it here. In response, the American Center for Law and Justice has issued a rebuttal statement....
By Fred Barbash | August 29, 2005; 02:55 PM ET | Comments (3)
Roberts Documents
From today's batch of released documents, Jesse J. Holland of the AP reports: Supreme Court nominee John Roberts pushed the Reagan-era Justice Department to get its conservative policies enacted into law to make it more difficult for future presidents to abrogate them, documents showed Monday. Roberts, who was an assistant to Attorney General William French Smith in 1982, co-wrote a memo to the attorney general noting that many of the department's conservative policies, including decisions not to seek busing or hiring quotas, "could be instantly reversed when a new administration took office." "In certain areas _ busing and quotas, for example _ it makes eminent sense to pursue legislation to guarantee that our policies cannot be easily undone," said Roberts in a March 15, 1982 memo he co-wrote with fellow special assistant Carolyn Kuhl....
By Fred Barbash | August 29, 2005; 02:40 PM ET | Email a Comment
Press Release: New NARAL Ad
NARAL Pro-Choice America, which withdrew an earlier controversial ad critical of Roberts, has a new one. Here's the announcement: This morning, NARAL Pro-Choice America released a television advertisement focusing on John Roberts' disturbing record on privacy and choice. The ad highlights a memo written by Roberts for the U.S. Attorney General in 1981, in which he calls an established liberty a "so-called 'right to privacy'" and a brief he co-authored a decade later calling for the overturn of Roe v. Wade. You can check out the ad and supporting document on NARAL's Web site....
By Fred Barbash | August 26, 2005; 12:04 PM ET | Comments (3)
Sen. Feinstein: JR's view on Roe critical
From the San Francisco Chronicle: Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-Calif.], speaking to a large gathering of lawyers, made it clear Wednesday that maintaining a woman's right to have an abortion would be the litmus test she would apply in deciding whether to support Judge John Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court. Feinstein, who has long supported abortion rights, has said Roberts' view of the landmark Roe vs. Wade abortion ruling would influence her decision on his nomination as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But her comments to the lawyers and to reporters afterward marked the first time she has stated that her vote on Roberts' nomination would hinge on his position on this single contentious issue. "It would be very difficult for me to vote to confirm someone to the Supreme Court whom I knew would overturn Roe and return our country to the days of the 1950s," the...
By Fred Barbash | August 25, 2005; 11:19 AM ET | Comments (24)
Schumer, Feingold: JR's Ethical Questions
Jesse J. Holland of the AP reports via The Post: Two Democratic senators said Wednesday that they want Supreme Court nominee John Roberts to explain before his confirmation hearings why he continued to judge a lawsuit against the Bush administration while being interviewed to be a justice. "It is clear that you have long understood the ethical issues raised by continuing to work on a case in which a party is considering you for another position," Judiciary Committee Sens. Charles Schumer of New York and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin said in a letter to Roberts....
By Fred Barbash | August 24, 2005; 03:55 PM ET | Comments (5)
U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Support Roberts
The AP reports that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has endorsed JR's confirmation: "Roberts has attracted broad, bipartisan support for his fairness, keen intellect, open-mindedness, and judicious practice of the law," said Tom Donohue, the chamber's president and CEO. "He is highly regarded and well respected by the legal and business communities." The chamber is the world's largest business federation representing more than three million businesses and organizations. Roberts did some work for the chamber during his time as a private attorney. He represented the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in a battle over a groundbreaking law in Maine designed to lower drug prices for state residents without insurance coverage. The law let the state negotiate for lower prices and if prices didn't drop in three years, Maine could impose price controls....
By Fred Barbash | August 24, 2005; 10:54 AM ET | Comments (5)
PFAW: Oppose Roberts
People for the American Way has announced its opposition to the confirmation of Judge Roberts. "A review of John Roberts' record and the tens of thousands of pages of documents so far released by the Administration show that confirming John Roberts would endanger much of the progress made by the nation in civil rights over the past half-century," the organization said in a news release. John Roberts has spent much of the past two decades in political and legal positions of great influence. The public record that has been revealed over recent weeks demonstrates that Roberts has consistently advocated positions that would undermine Americans' fundamental rights and liberties under the Constitution and federal law. The confirmation of John Roberts to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor would bring dramatic change, move the Supreme Court significantly to the right, and shift the balance of the court to the great and lasting detriment...
By Fred Barbash | August 24, 2005; 10:32 AM ET | Comments (3)
Specter Questions
Jesse J. Holland of the AP reports: Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter plans to use the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts to criticize what he calls the high court's judicial activism, saying Tuesday that justices have started acting as a "super legislature." "I am concerned about the Supreme Court's judicial activism which has usurped congressional authority," Specter, R-Pa., said in a letter to Roberts, who will face senators' questions at his confirmation hearing on Sept. 6. The AP also reports that People for the American Way is expected to announce its opposition to Roberts's nomination at a press briefing Wednesday....
By Fred Barbash | August 23, 2005; 06:28 PM ET | Comments (3)
Cox News: Black leaders want more info
Patrina A. Bostic of the Cox News Service reports: Black legal and civil rights experts said Thursday that Supreme Court nominee John Roberts should not be confirmed unless more information about his record is released. Kim Keenan, a past president of the National Bar Association, told a conference organized by the Black Leadership Forum that the American Bar Association's rating of Roberts as "highly qualified" for the bench was premature. "It's disappointing that the largest organization of the lawyers in the world would reach a decision on a nominee without a record," said Keenan, a 17-year ABA member. "And let me say on behalf of the largest organization of lawyers of color in the world, we don't have the luxury of pronouncing a candidate qualified without a record," she said of the National Bar Association....
By Fred Barbash | August 19, 2005; 10:13 AM ET | Comments (2)
JR Documents: "Solidly conservative voice"
Richard Cowan of Reuters has the following take on the documents released today (see two previous posts as well): As a White House lawyer in the 1980s, Supreme Court nominee John Roberts was a solidly conservative voice on the hottest topics before President Ronald Reagan, from advising on meetings with private groups undercut a Communist regime in Nicaragua to urging opposition to any women's equal rights constitutional amendment. As an associate counsel, Roberts' primary function dealt with preventing misuses of the presidential seal or Reagan's photo or signature for commercial gain. But Roberts later provided legal counsel on weightier issues. In a Jan. 26, 1986, White House memo, Roberts said he had reviewed a proposal for Reagan to meet with two groups active on Central American issues such as helping Nicaraguan "contras." Roberts wrote that there was no legal prohibition to stop such a briefing, but that "objections may...
By Fred Barbash | August 18, 2005; 06:55 PM ET | Comments (1)
JR Documents: Sex Discrimination
From the newest batch of released documents from Roberts' years as associate White House Counsel, comes this story by Jesse J. Holland of the AP via washingtonpost.com: Supreme Court nominee John Roberts criticized state efforts to battle sex discrimination, calling programs promoting affirmative action and comparable worth "highly objectionable" in his legal advice to President Reagan. Roberts, who has been nominated by President Bush to replace the retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, worked as associate counsel in the Reagan White House in the early 1980s during Reagan's first term. In a Jan. 17, 1983, memo, Roberts was responding to a "Fifty States Project," which he described as addressing "perceived problems of gender discrimination" and which was to be sent to state leaders and women's groups. He advised the White House to exercise caution in showing support for the proposals. "Many of the reported proposals and efforts are themselves highly...
By Fred Barbash | August 18, 2005; 02:21 PM ET | Comments (4)
The Morning Papers
Good morning. Rick Klein and Charlie Savage report in the Boston Globe: Leading liberal groups, looking to engage the public, say they will probably fight the Senate confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Judge John G. Roberts Jr. before hearings begin on Sept. 6 -- a campaign that could include statements and television ads portraying him as a conservative with extreme views on abortion, affirmative action, civil rights, and equal rights for women. Ralph G. Neas, president of the liberal People for the American Way, said he will ask his group's leadership for a statement against Roberts this week. He said a ''significant number of progressive organizations" will follow suit against President Bush's pick to succeed retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. ''The evidence is so convincing and so overwhelming," said Neas, who fought against nominee Robert Bork and Justice Clarence Thomas. ''Without question, [Roberts] was a charter member of the...
By Fred Barbash | August 18, 2005; 03:01 AM ET | Comments (2)
Schedule for JR Confirmation Hearings
The AP reports that the Senate Judiciary Committee announced its plans for Roberts' Sept. 6 confirmation hearings. The schedule includes having the nominee questioned by the 18 senators on the panel for almost an hour each. The committee also will hold one hearing that will be closed to the public, leaders said. Senate Judiciary chairman Arlen Specter and top Democrat Patrick Leahy said Wednesday that Roberts would have to face almost an hour's worth of questions from each committee member before his confirmation process ends. Each senator will get at least 50 minutes to question Roberts and listen to his answers: 30 minutes in a first round and 20 minutes in a second round, the two senators said. Specter and Leahy also said in a letter to Judiciary members that more rounds for questioning could be scheduled if necessary. Roberts will be able to give an opening statement on...
By Fred Barbash | August 17, 2005; 08:17 PM ET | Email a Comment
ABA: JR "well qualified."
Jesse Holland of the Associated Press reports that the American Bar Association has given Judge Roberts a "well qualified" rating, as expected....
By Fred Barbash | August 17, 2005; 04:48 PM ET | Comments (2)
Document Dump 8/18
The National Archives has announced the release of 38,546 pages of presidential records from the Staff Member Office Files of John Roberts tomorrow. It says in a release that 1,708 pages have been withheld from these files under FOIA exemptions. This is the second opening of Roberts' records in response to requests since the nomination of Judge Roberts to the Supreme Court....
By Fred Barbash | August 17, 2005; 02:58 PM ET | Email a Comment
Press Releases: Reaction to Kennedy, Leahy
The Judicial Confirmation Network issues press release responding to comments yesterday by U.S. Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.): Senate liberals are obviously getting desperate. We've already seen the 'smear' from NARAL, and now we're getting into the 'fear' part of the liberal tag-team's 'fear-and-smear' campaign against Judge Roberts. The Center for Individual Freedom issued this statement: "The remarkable control that liberal groups have over their puppets in the Senate is plain for all to see. "Liberal groups yanked on the leashes of Democratic Senators, and they responded like well-trained dogs, directing a torrent of misleading attacks at Judge Roberts....
By Fred Barbash | August 17, 2005; 12:32 PM ET | Comments (3)
Leahy: JR's views "far right wing."
Sen. Patrick Leahy, ranking Judiciary Committee Democrat, issued a statement today calling for the release of more documents, which, he said, are even more essential now that senators have had a glimpse of Roberts' views: Those papers that we have received paint a picture of John Roberts as an eager and aggressive advocate of policies that are deeply tinged with the ideology of the far right wing of his party then, and now. In influential White House and Department of Justice positions, John Roberts expressed views that were among the most radical being offered by a cadre intent on reversing decades of policies on civil rights, voting rights, women's rights, privacy, and access to justice....
By Fred Barbash | August 16, 2005; 09:00 PM ET | Email a Comment
Leahy: JR's views "radical."
David Espo of AP has this article on Sen. Leahy's reaction to the Roberts papers: Sen. Patrick Leahy, who will lead the Democratic questioning at John Roberts' confirmation hearings, criticized the Supreme Court nominee Tuesday as an "eager, aggressive advocate" for policies of the Republican far right wing. One day after the release of 5,000 pages of Reagan-era records, the Vermont Democrat said in a statement that Roberts' views were "among the most radical being offered by a cadre intent on reversing decades of policies on civil rights, voting rights, women's rights, privacy and access to justice."...
By Fred Barbash | August 16, 2005; 08:51 PM ET | Comments (1)
Documents: JR on Abortion Clinic Bombers
Mary Diebel of the Scripps Howard News Service, reports: As a young Reagan administration lawyer, John Roberts strongly advised against White House clemency for abortion-clinic bombers and cautioned against dealing with a California doctor who sought to bury aborted fetuses at Arlington National Cemetery. More reports on documents in previous posts here and here....
By Fred Barbash | August 15, 2005; 05:36 PM ET | Email a Comment
Documents: JR on Silent Prayer, Gender Pay Equity
CNN, based on newly released WH documents, reports: Supreme Court nominee John Roberts supported the idea of allowing prayer in public schools, writing as a White House lawyer in 1985 that such efforts were "within the constitutional power of Congress." But while critical of the Supreme Court for banning school prayer, he also said legislative efforts to go around the courts were "bad policy."...
By Fred Barbash | August 15, 2005; 05:31 PM ET | Email a Comment
Press Release: Friends of JR on Tour
Press Release Progress for America (PFA) today announced a 14-state, 2-week barnstorm by 15 of Supreme Court nominee Judge John Roberts' closest friends, former colleagues and prominent legal experts in advance of the September 6th Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. These key personal and legal surrogates will call for history to guide Roberts' confirmation process and will specifically emphasize the fair treatment of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in her 1993 Senate hearings....
By Fred Barbash | August 15, 2005; 03:49 PM ET | Email a Comment
Documents: Roberts at White House
A new batch of documents was released today from John Roberts' years as associate White House counsel. Here is one of what will undoubtedly be numerous stories drawn from those documents. Hope Yen of the Associated Press reports: As a young government attorney, John Roberts advised the White House to support congressional efforts to allow school prayer, arguing that a Supreme Court ruling striking down the practice "seems indefensible." In a Nov. 21, 1985, memo released Monday by the National Archives, Roberts was responding to a move by Congress to permit "group silent prayer or reflection in public schools." He said he would not object if Justice Department officials announced that President Reagan had no formal role in passing an amendment to that effect but said he would support such a move. The Supreme Court's conclusion that "the Constitution prohibits such a moment of silent reflection -- or even...
By Fred Barbash | August 15, 2005; 03:03 PM ET | Email a Comment
Fallout from NARAL Ad
"Liberals have a harder time getting away with character assassination," says the Rutland (Vt.) Times in an editorial. "That's what NARAL Pro-Choice America learned after it aired an ad suggesting that Supreme Court nominee John Roberts was somehow sympathetic to violent anti-abortion extremists." The Ad and its consequences for the Democratic Party are front and center this morning. Dana Milbank in TWP writes: The decision by the abortion rights group NARAL Pro-Choice America to pull an incendiary ad attacking President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court has produced a fresh round of recriminations within the Democratic Party and a return to a nagging question: Has the opposition lost its nerve? Andrew Cohen, in a CBS, commentary says: It ought to tell you something about the paucity of the legal and political "ammunition" against Roberts that these non-starters are all that anyone has come up with as the ritualistic deflation...
By Fred Barbash | August 13, 2005; 07:50 AM ET | Comments (1)
Committee Dems respond to AG on privilege claim
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have written the following letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, expressing concern about a reported delay in releasing documents and rejecting the privilege claim made by the administration. What follows is a press release from the office of ranking Democrat, Sen. Patrick Leahy (Vt.) Following is the text of the letter that all eight Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee sent Friday to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, asking him to reconsider his denial to the Senate Judiciary Committee of the Democratic senators' narrow request for work papers on 16 cases (out of hundreds of cases) from John Roberts's work in the Office of the Solicitor General during the presidency of George H.W. Bush. The senators cite precedents and several reasons why the records are important to the Senate's consideration of the Roberts nomination. They also suggest a meeting with AG Gonzales to...
By Fred Barbash | August 12, 2005; 03:34 PM ET | Comments (3)
NARAL Pulls Ad
NARAL has pulled the ad criticized for associating John G. Roberts Jr. with anti-abortion violence. Republicans and Democrats alike had attacked the ad and it had been called "false" by the nonpartisan Annenberg Political Fact Check organization. (See previous posts for background.) NARAL sent a letter to Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), who had condemned the ad, saying: This week, we began a television advertising campaign aimed at focusing greater public attention on an important aspect of Mr. Roberts' record. Unfortunately, the debate over that advertisement has become a distraction from the serious discussion we hoped to have with the American public. Therefore, we are changing from our current advertisement to one that examines Mr. Roberts' record on several points, including his advocacy for overturning Roe v. Wade, his statement questioning the right to privacy, and his arguments against using a federal civil rights law to protect women...
By Fred Barbash | August 12, 2005; 02:53 AM ET | Comments (1)
Document Dump: 8/15
On Aug. 15, the Reagan Library will release 5,383 pages of records from the files of John G. Roberts Jr., from 1982-1986, when he was associate counsel to President Reagan. His duties included counseling on the president's constitutional powers and responsibilities, as well as other legal issues affecting the executive branch. See details here. The archives release notes: The requirements for review and release of Presidential records are established by the Presidential Records Act of 1978 and Executive Order 13233. This process is very labor-intensive and requires that National Archives staff conduct a page by page, word for word review of all records in order to protect, as required by law, sensitive information such as national security, personal privacy and law enforcement information. Following the National Archives review, by law, both the representatives of the former and the incumbent Presidents must have an opportunity to review all of the...
By Fred Barbash | August 11, 2005; 07:17 PM ET | Comments (2)
Specter: Pull NARAL Ad
Jesse Holland of the Associated Press reports: An abortion-rights group should withdraw a "blatantly untrue and unfair" ad opposing Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, says Sen. Arlen Specter, himself an abortion-rights supporter as well as leader of the panel that will consider the nomination....
By Fred Barbash | August 11, 2005; 05:43 PM ET | Comments (1)
Press Release: NARAL responds to criticism
Here is a copy of a lengthy response by NARAL Pro-Choice America to Factcheck.org's criticism of its ad: FACTCHECK.ORG COULD USE A GOOD FACTCHECKER Factcheck.org's analysis of the television advertisement released by NARAL Pro-Choice America on August 8, 2005 is deeply flawed, and its conclusion that the "ad is false" is unsubstantiated and should be retracted. The analysis, written by Matthew Barge, identified as a recent college graduate(1), is riddled with legal and factual errors and in many instances virtually mirrors the White House's talking points. One might disagree with the opinions stated in the ad or even have a different view of how John Roberts' role in a particular case should be characterized; however, every factual statement made in NARAL Pro-Choice America's ad is completely accurate and supported by objective documents. The ad is not "false." John Roberts did indeed file briefs supporting violent fringe groups, with the...
By Fred Barbash | August 10, 2005; 04:07 PM ET | Comments (2)
Roberts's Wake Forest Speech
Maura Reynolds of the Los Angeles Times has obtained a video of a speech Judge Roberts gave to Wake Forest University law students in February. Nothing startling, but: When a student asked Roberts to name his favorite justices, Scalia and Thomas were not on the list. Roberts reached back in history, praising Robert Jackson for his writings and Felix Frankfurter and John Marshall Harlan for their "analytical clarity." He said he also admired the "collegiality" of William J. Brennan and the current chief justice, William H. Rehnquist, for whom he once clerked....
By Fred Barbash | August 10, 2005; 07:53 AM ET | Comments (6)
Reuters: Specter Writes Roberts re: Questions
Susan Cornwell of Reuters reports: U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts was warned Monday that he will face questions at his confirmation hearings about whether he agreed with "judicial activism" on the court that sought to scale back Congress' authority. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, who will be running the hearings, wrote to the nominee to say he would be asking about two landmark Supreme Court decisions in the last decade that limited Congress' powers under the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. "What is your thinking on the jurisprudence of U.S. v. Lopez and U.S. v. Morrison, which overturned almost 60 years of Congress' power under the Commerce Clause?" Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, asked....
By Fred Barbash | August 8, 2005; 06:30 PM ET | Comments (3)
Reid Seeks Documents
Reuters reports: The Senate's leading Democrat asked the Bush administration Monday to reconsider its refusal to release internal documents written by Supreme Court nominee John Roberts while at the Justice Department. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said senators needed to see the documents from the years Roberts served as deputy solicitor general in order to examine 50-year-old conservative's candidacy effectively....
By Fred Barbash | August 8, 2005; 05:17 PM ET | Email a Comment
Roberts Interview from 7/2000 via ABC This Week
Below are some excerpts from George Stephanopoulos's ABC "This Week," featuring a videotape of John Roberts speaking in a July 2000 interview, in which Roberts gives his views on a number of cases from the just-concluded Supreme Court term, on subjects including abortion, school prayer and the direction of the court: STEPHANOPOULOS: And we begin today with that exclusive look at Judge John Roberts. Ever since President Bush picked him for the Supreme Court, we've seen a lot of him -- thanking the president, schmoozing senators, hopping in and out of cars. We've also heard a lot of people talking about Roberts and what kind of Supreme Court justice he'd be -- but barely a word from the judge. That's the tradition. Supreme Court nominees don't speak out until their hearings, and those don't begin until early next month. But this morning, for the first time on national television, we...
By Fred Barbash | August 8, 2005; 12:47 AM ET | Comments (12)
Chief Justice Hospitalized Briefly
Chief Justice Rehnquist was hospitalized briefly today and then released. Here is the story by Gina Holland of the Associated Press via The Post....
By Fred Barbash | August 4, 2005; 07:34 PM ET | Email a Comment
Roberts Submits Answers to SJC
Hope Yen of the the Associated Press reports Roberts's answers to a Senate Judiciary Committee questionnaire: "A sound judicial philosophy should reflect recognition of the fact that the judge operates within a system of rules developed over the years by other judges equally striving to live up to the judicial oath," Roberts said in response to a question about judicial activism. At the same time, he writes, "judges must be constantly aware that their role, while important, is limited." "They do not have a commission to solve society's problems, as they see them, but simply to decide cases before them according to the rule of law," Roberts stated. In the questionnaire, Roberts also writes that he does not recall ever being a member of the conservative Federalist Society, although he participated in events including a 1993 panel and gave a 2003 luncheon speech. "According to recent press reports, in 1997...
By Fred Barbash | August 2, 2005; 06:41 PM ET | Comments (2)
AG on Document Release
The attorney general balks at release of documents, Reuters reports in interview with Gonzales....
By Fred Barbash | August 1, 2005; 03:59 PM ET | Email a Comment
ACLU Wishes 'retiring' CJ well
In an unusual press release dated Aug. 1: The American Civil Liberties Union today wished retiring Chief Justice Rehnquist well in his battle with cancer, but warned that the Bush administration was now in a position to reshape the Supreme Court for the next generation. "Though we disagreed with the Chief Justice on many issues, we wish him all the best," said Steven R. Shapiro, the ACLU's National Legal Director. "With two vacancies to fill on a closely divided Supreme Court, the stakes could not be higher." FYI: The link is now down. In a comment posted on this site, the ACLU says mistakes were made. This was a release drafted shortly after the O'Connor retirement that was prepared but never published. We believe that the publishing system at ACLU.org made it findable by search engines in a technical error. We've removed the page completely from our system. Emily Whitfield...
By Fred Barbash | August 1, 2005; 08:07 AM ET | Comments (10)
Dems OK date; Want documents.
The AP's Jesse J. Holland reports: "Confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee John Roberts will begin the day after Labor Day, but Senate Democrats said Friday the White House will have to release more documents to ensure he's wearing a justice's black robes before the new term begins in October. "'There is no reason why the date cannot be met, but we need the full cooperation of the administration," said top Senate Judiciary Committee Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont.'"...
By Fred Barbash | July 29, 2005; 07:55 PM ET | Comments (3)
On again: Hearings Sept. 6
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), Judiciary Committee chairman, announced on the Senate floor that hearings are set for Sept. 6....
By Fred Barbash | July 29, 2005; 07:01 PM ET | Email a Comment
Hearing Date Now on Hold
Reuters news service reports on washingtonpost.com that an agreement between Democrats and Republicans on when to start Senate hearings on Roberts's nomination has fallen apart. "We thought we had an arrangement and it fell through," said Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) told Reuters. "We are working on it."...
By Lexie Verdon | July 29, 2005; 04:36 PM ET | Comments (6)
Hearing News Conference Canceled.
The Washington Post's Charles Babington reports that a news conference to announce the date of confirmation hearings has been canceled. It's not clear yet whether the date remains firm at Sept. 6....
By Fred Barbash | July 29, 2005; 03:21 PM ET | Email a Comment
Hearings Sept. 6
The Associated Press via TWP also reports that an announcement this afternoon will set the start of confirmation hearings for Sept. 6....
By Fred Barbash | July 29, 2005; 01:56 PM ET | Email a Comment
John Edwards Criticizes Roberts
Jesse J. Holland of the AP reports via The Post: Former Democratic senator and vice presidential candidate John Edwards harshly criticized Supreme Court nominee John Roberts Friday, calling him "a partisan for conservative causes." Roberts, finishing his second week of visits with senators in search of confirmation votes, was being criticized from the sidelines in a speech that Edwards prepared for the American Constitution Society....
By Fred Barbash | July 29, 2005; 12:52 PM ET | Email a Comment
Reuters: Hearings to Start Sept. 6
Reuters is reporting that: Leaders of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee plan to begin U.S. Supreme Court nominee John Roberts's confirmation hearings on Sept. 6, congressional aides said on Friday. Chairman Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, and Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the panel's top Democrat, intend to formally announce the date later on Friday, the aides said....
By Fred Barbash | July 29, 2005; 11:53 AM ET | Email a Comment
Senate Vote Count
From the AP via The Post:Survey by the Associated Press. Of the 100 senators, 23 had not responded as of Thursday. Totals: Vote Yes: 15. Lean Yes: 15. Vote No: 0. Lean No: 0. Uncommitted: 47. Totals by party: Vote Yes, Republicans: 15. Lean Yes, Republicans: 14. Lean Yes, Democrats: 1. Uncommitted Democrats: 35. Uncommitted Republicans: 11. Uncommitted independent: 1...
By Fred Barbash | July 28, 2005; 06:37 PM ET | Comments (1)
Kennedy on Roberts's Civil Rights Record
From the AP via The Post:After days of Democratic deference to John Roberts, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) said Thursday that documents made public so far indicate the Supreme Court nominee holds a "rather cramped view of the Voting Rights Act."...
By Fred Barbash | July 28, 2005; 06:31 PM ET | Email a Comment
Sen. Nelson Leans Toward Approval
Following a meeting with Roberts, Sen. Ben. Nelson (D-Neb.) makes positive comments, the AP reports....
By Fred Barbash | July 28, 2005; 02:46 PM ET | Email a Comment
Dems on Documents
Jesse J. Holland of the Associated Press via washingtonpost.com reports: Democrats gave no ground Wednesday on their demands for more of Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' legal documents, saying the limited release by the White House could delay a vote to put him on the bench. "The Senate will need the White House's full cooperation to expedite the scheduling," said Patrick Leahy of Vermont, who also said he would vote against Roberts if he found the nominee to have an "activist" agenda for the high court....
By Fred Barbash | July 27, 2005; 06:47 PM ET | Email a Comment
Specter: Begin Hearings Aug. 29
Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said today that "we have to start" confirmation hearings on Aug. 29. Ranking Democrat Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont expressed some reservations....
By Fred Barbash | July 27, 2005; 11:57 AM ET | Email a Comment
More Documents: Roberts and Nominee O'Connor
Gina Holland reports for AP that: As a young Justice Department lawyer, John Roberts helped guide Supreme Court nominee Sandra Day O'Connor through the Senate confirmation process he now confronts as the choice to replace her. Roberts was just six weeks into his job at the Justice Department when he drafted a memo to Kenneth Starr describing his work with O'Connor. The young Roberts said he helped ready O'Connor for her confirmation hearing, preparing draft answers to questions she was likely to be asked. "The approach was to avoid giving specific responses to any direct questions on legal issues likely to come before the court, but demonstrating in the response a firm command of the subject area and awareness of the relevant precedents and arguments," Roberts wrote in the Sept. 17, 1981, memo to Starr, who later became solicitor general and then served as a special prosecutor investigating President...
By Fred Barbash | July 26, 2005; 08:13 PM ET | Comments (2)
Dems Sign Letter
The New York Times reports: All eight Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee signed a letter to the White House expressing their disappointment that the Bush administration was not giving them all the information they have asked and urging a change of heart. But the White House was standing fast, as were their Republican allies in the Senate. The eight Democrats said it is possible that the information to be gleaned from the documents they have already been promised may indeed be enough. "But it would be premature for either the Senate or the White House to make that determination now," the senators wrote. Republican senators, meanwhile, said the White House has already been cooperative enough....
By Fred Barbash | July 26, 2005; 08:07 PM ET | Comments (1)
Sifting Through Documents
AP reports that: Senate Republicans, determined to seat John Roberts in time for the Supreme Court's fall term, pressed Democrats Tuesday to agree on a timetable for a vote amid political wrangling over how much of Roberts' past legal writings must be made available....
By Fred Barbash | July 26, 2005; 08:01 PM ET | Email a Comment
AG: As Justice, JR not 'bound' by settled law
The Associated Press interviews Attorney General Gonzales:If confirmed to the Supreme Court, John Roberts would not be bound by his past statement that the 1973 decision legalizing abortion is settled law, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Tuesday. Gonzales, in an interview with The Associated Press, said circumstances had changed. "If you're asking a circuit court judge, like Judge Roberts was asked, yes, it is settled law because you're bound by the precedent," Gonzales said. "If you're a Supreme Court justice, that's a different question because a Supreme Court justice is not obliged to follow precedent if you believe it's wrong," Gonzales said....
By Fred Barbash | July 26, 2005; 03:49 PM ET | Comments (16)
New CA Decision by Roberts
From the AP via washingtonpost.com: In a decision written by Supreme Court nominee John Roberts, a federal appeals court on Tuesday dismissed a class-action lawsuit seeking higher disability benefits for certain retired federal law enforcement officers and firefighters. The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said federal courts lacked jurisdiction because Congress had given the job of administering specific claims for retirement benefits to the Office of Personnel Management and to a civil service appeals board. And here is the opinion....
By Fred Barbash | July 26, 2005; 03:38 PM ET | Comments (2)
White House on Nomination
Jennifer Love of the Associated Press reports: The White House on Monday warned Democrats not to make extensive requests for Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' legal writings in previous Republican administrations, saying many such documents are "out of bounds." Separately, the Supreme Court nominee waved off questions about whether he was a member of a conservative legal organization. Roberts, on his fourth day paying courtesy calls on senators, hasn't answered questions since President Bush announced him -- as is typical for nominees -- and one Democratic senator said the matter wouldn't affect the confirmation....
By Fred Barbash | July 25, 2005; 05:47 PM ET | Email a Comment
Roberts and Federalist Society
The Associated Press reports that Supreme Court nominee John Roberts declined Monday to explain why he was listed in a Federalist Society leadership directory when the White House says he doesn't recall being a member of the conservative legal organization. (See Charles Lane's story in The Washington Post today.) Roberts was asked by a reporter about the discrepancy during a morning get-acquainted meeting with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif). He smiled but didn't reply, the AP says. "I don't think he wants to take any questions," Feinstein interjected during the session with photographers and reporters that was part of the meeting in her office with the Supreme Court nominee."No, no, no thanks," Roberts added....
By Fred Barbash | July 25, 2005; 10:31 AM ET | Comments (2)
Gang of 14
The bipartisan Gang of 14 met today and sees little trouble for Roberts, says The Post's Charles Babington.The possibility that Senate Democrats might filibuster President Bush's Supreme Court nominee grew even more remote today, as key lawmakers said they saw no justification to deploy the tactic that has been used in recent years to block several judicial nominees. The so-called Gang of 14, the bipartisan group of lawmakers who averted a showdown last spring over a threat to ban filibusters, met today for the first time since John G. Roberts Jr. was tapped for the court. Several members later said the nomination will not trigger a filibuster unless researchers discover some political bombshell before the Senate hearings slated for late summer....
By Fred Barbash | July 21, 2005; 02:17 PM ET | Comments (1)
Attorney General Gonzales
The attorney general appeared on network news programs this morning to talk about the Roberts nomination. Here are excerpts from his interview with Steve Doocy of Fox News: DOOCY: Judge John Roberts probably feels pretty good today. I was reading one of the New York papers -- that apparently a top Democrat said of his nomination: He's in. There's no need to count the votes. Why is this guy a good guy? GONZALES: Well, he's very well qualified. No one can argue regarding his professional competence. He's got a wonderful record as an appellate specialist, great record in the executive branch. And I think no one has any questions regarding his professional competence. Those that know Judge Roberts, obviously, speak very highly of his personal integrity. He's a person of great character, a person of great courage. And we're also very, very confident in his judicial philosophy. This is a...
By Fred Barbash | July 21, 2005; 07:49 AM ET | Email a Comment
Reaction: Sen. McCain
Comments by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in an interview with radio host Don Imus, July 20: MCCAIN: Oh, absolutely. I think is really an outstanding pick that the president has made. His credentials are remarkable. Thirty-nine times, he's argued a case before the United States Supreme Court. He has intellect, and he has maturity. And I don't know if you saw him when he made his brief statement after the president announced him last night. It was -- it was quite a nice job he did there. And so I don't pretend to speak for my other members of the gang of 14, but it's hard for me to believe that he would meet an extraordinary circumstances criteria. Now, obviously he is conservative. Just as Justice Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsberg were liberal. I don't -- and I think that's exactly what the president said he would appoint when he...
By Fred Barbash | July 20, 2005; 10:11 AM ET | Comments (7)
Reaction: Sen. Kennedy
Matt Lauer interviewed Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) on the "Today Show" this morning. Here are some excerpts:LAUER: So when you voted against John Roberts in 2003 you said the following, quote, I am concerned about Mr. Roberts' efforts to limit reproductive rights as a government lawyer, his advocacy against affirmative action and federal environmental protection laws, and his efforts to shield the states from individual suits and to limit Congress' ability to pass legislation regulating state conduct in the name of states' rights. Have you changed your opinion in any way on Judge Roberts? KENNEDY: Well, these are really questions, aren't they? And that's what this whole process is about.We congratulate Judge Roberts with the nomination. And now the president has fulfilled his responsibility; we in the Senate have to fulfill ours. And the real question I think that Americans are thinking about this morning is: Whose side is Judge...
By Fred Barbash | July 20, 2005; 08:38 AM ET | Comments (6)
Reaction: Judicial Confirmation Network
Statement from Judicial Confirmation Network counsel Wendy E. Long: "President Bush has kept his promise to the American people with his choice of Judge John Roberts for the Supreme Court. Judge Roberts is the cream of the crop: he is widely respected as one of the most brilliant judges in the country, and has an outstanding record in public service and as an advocate before the Supreme Court. "Judge Roberts' record and his testimony before the Senate when he was confirmed unanimously for the D.C. Circuit two years ago reflect a jurist who prizes faithfulness to the Constitution and the rule of law, and who respects the limited role of federal courts in our constitutional system of government."...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 10:11 PM ET | Comments (2)
Reaction: Alliance for Justice
Alliance for Justice Statement: "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...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 10:03 PM ET | Comments (3)
Reaction: Kerry
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)"Americans deserve a Supreme Court that is fair, independent, ethical and served by justices committed to our constitutional freedoms rather than an ideological agenda. Justice O'Connor refused to use her position as a means to advance a political agenda. In replacing her, we must be confident Judge Roberts will do the same. "We know Judge Roberts is no Sandra Day O'Connor, and the White House has sent a clear signal. There are serious questions that must be answered involving Judge Roberts's judicial philosophy as demonstrated over his short time on the appellate court. "The Senate must learn whether he has clear consistent principles upholding constitutional standards like civil rights and the right to privacy in Roe v. Wade. These issues are in serious question if you take even a cursory glance at his record. "The American people expect the Senate to fulfill its duty to conduct a...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 09:44 PM ET | Email a Comment
Reaction: Feingold
From Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) "Evaluating the nomination of Judge John Roberts Jr. is a responsibility I take very seriously and one that I look forward to as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Supreme Court justices can have a uniquely significant impact on our country for years, even decades. "While I voted in favor of Judge Roberts to be a circuit court judge in 2003, the level of scrutiny that the Senate gives nominees to the highest court in the land must be even greater than that for any other appointed position in our government. I will review his record carefully and look forward to questioning him in the Judiciary Committee's hearings."...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 09:42 PM ET | Email a Comment
The President's Announcement
"Good evening. "One of the most consequential decisions a president makes is his appointment of a justice to the Supreme Court. "When a president chooses a justice, he's placing in human hands the authority and majesty of the law. "The decisions of the Supreme Court affect the life of every American. "And so a nominee to that court must be a person of superb credentials and the highest integrity, a person who will faithfully apply the Constitution and keep our founding promise of equal justice under law."I have found such a person in Judge John Roberts. "And tonight I am honored to announce that I am nominating him to serve as associate justice of the Supreme Court. "John Roberts currently serves on one of the most influential courts in the nation, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. "Before he was a respected judge, he...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 09:20 PM ET | Comments (10)
And the nominee is.......
Roberts, says the AP. John G. Roberts....
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 07:44 PM ET | Comments (2)
Maybe Not Clement?
With 3 1/2 hours to go before the announcement, some observers are steering reporters away from Clement as the choice. Rumors about J. Michael Luttig of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit are reemerging, emanating from CNN, which reported that he was gathering his family, all dressed up, for some sort of event. Check back often for the latest buzz. Here's an article from The Post's Charles Lane and Jerry Markon about Luttig....
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 05:39 PM ET | Comments (7)
On Timing
Here are some comments by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to reporters in response to questions about the timing of the Supreme Court announcement: "Well, the way I look at it: If this is a noncontroversial candidate, there's no reason that we can't use the August recess to have the Judiciary Committee members read the briefs. In fact, if this is a judge who has written opinions -- when I said briefs, I mean opinions -- they can wait for the FBI's investigation. The Judiciary Committee does their own. ABA does work. "This can all go forward and there's no reason we can't do hearings early in September. If you had hearings that took a good long week, everyone would have all the opportunity they need to ask their questions. And there would be, hopefully, just one report; no minority reviews from the senators.And if that were the case,...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 03:42 PM ET | Comments (1)
From the White House
Here is the White House e-mail on the announcement: "THE PRESIDENT WILL ANNOUNCE HIS NOMINEE TO THE SUPREME COURT THIS EVENING AT 9:00PM EST FROM THE WHITE HOUSE - TODAY'S PRESS BRIEFING IS CANCELED."...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 01:54 PM ET | Comments (1)
Tonight at Nine
The White House says the president will announce his choice for the Supreme Court tonight at nine. Some observers are cautioning about jumping to the conclusion that Edith Clement is the designated nominee. For a rolling sampler of Clement's opinions, see Tom Goldstein's Supreme Court Nomination Blog. Tom says he will update throughout the day....
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 01:19 PM ET | Email a Comment
Bush Likes Surprises
From The Washington Post's Mike Allen: A single, arguably self-evident, partly-tongue-in-check sentence by White House press secretary Scott McClellan has single-handedly wiped the CIA leak story off the cable news airwaves: "The president is closer today than he was yesterday on naming a nominee." No time -- or day -- for an announcement has been announced. A wide swath of Republican officials say they expect it today, or very soon. But don't forget what Bush's aides often remind reporters: The president likes surprises....
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 12:56 PM ET | Comments (3)
Any Moment Now
The Washington Post's Peter Baker (as well as wire services) reports that White House allies are being told to expect an announcement as early as this afternoon. Judge Edith Clement of the 5th Circuit is the consensus front-runner, though no one outside the inner circle claims to know for sure. Here is what the president said when asked about it at 12:10 p.m. during an appearance with Australia's prime minister:QUESTION: "Can you tell us, as you consider Supreme Court nominees, how important it is to you to replace Justice O'Connor with another woman? And can you bring us up to date on whether you've completed interviewing candidates?" BUSH: "First, I'm comfortable where we are in the process. That's important for you to know.Secondly, I have thought about a variety of people, people from different walks of life, some of whom I've known before, some of whom I had never met...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 12:11 PM ET | Email a Comment
Any Time Now?
The Post's Mike Allen now reports that Republican aides on Capitol Hill said as they arrived this morning that they had been told to expect an announcement as soon as today. Hill Republicans said the leader in the buzz derby was Judge Edith Brown Clement of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, based in New Orleans, who was nominated to that court by Bush in 2001 and quickly confirmed by the Senate. (See profiles of the 5th Circuit and various candidates at washingtonpost.com.) But those officials were cautious because they had been so recently taken in by rumors about the retirement of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, which he quashed with a statement last week. Some Republicans immediately speculated that the announcement -- once expected closer to Bush's departure at the end of the month for a working vacation at his ranch in Crawford, Tex. -- had been...
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 08:53 AM ET | Comments (5)
Bush-Specter in Private Meeting
Mike Allen of The Washington Post reports this morning that Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) paid a last-minute, unannounced visit to the White House last night to meet with the president. The meeting came amid reports that well-wired Republicans expect President Bush to announce his pick sooner (this week) rather than later (next week). Specter was last at the White House a week ago today, when he and three Senate colleagues munched on breakfast with the president and Vice President Cheney and chewed over possible choices, plus the timetable for hearings. The president, who prefers to conduct business by daylight, was unusually busy last night. He was also eating chilled asparagus soup and pan-roasted halibut with ginger-carrot butter at a rare black-tie White House dinner, for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh....
By Fred Barbash | July 19, 2005; 07:31 AM ET | Comments (2)
Bush on Nomination
President Bush, asked today at a news conference with the Indian prime minister how close he was to a Supreme Court announcement, repeated earlier comments that he was continuing to consult widely on a choice but that he would act expeditiously in order to make sure the new justice can be in place for the beginning of the next term. Here are excerpts from his comments: QUESTION: "We understand you are now close to a decision on a Supreme Court nominee." BUSH: "Really. It's amazing how Washington works, Mr. Prime Minister." QUESTION: "Have you narrowed down the list and met with finalists? Will you now share the list with Senate leaders to avoid a confirmation battle as Democrats have proposed?" BUSH: "Well, thank you for telling me where I am in the process. I appreciate that. We have consulted with the Senate. We will continue to consult with the Senate....
By Fred Barbash | July 18, 2005; 11:39 AM ET | Comments (1)
Any Day Now
The Washington Post's Peter Baker reports this morning that the White House may be days away from a nomination announcement, having narrowed the list to a few people. Some advisers believe he is increasingly inclined to appoint a woman."President Bush," writes Baker, "accelerating his search for a new Supreme Court justice, appears to have narrowed his list of candidates to no more than a few finalists and could announce his decision in the next few days, Republican strategists informed about White House plans said yesterday. "Advisers to Bush had anticipated an announcement closer to the end of the month, but the White House signaled allies over the weekend to be prepared for a nomination this week, according to the strategists, who asked not to be named because the process remains officially confidential. 'We've been told to be ready,' one strategist said..... "Laying the groundwork for his nomination, Bush used his...
By Fred Barbash | July 18, 2005; 03:55 AM ET | Comments (2)
Liberates the President
From Gina Holland of the Associated Press: "Richard Garnett, a Notre Dame law professor and former Rehnquist law clerk, said "the chief justice's decision liberates the president." "The question mark that was hanging over the process is now gone,'" Garnett said. "President Bush has fewer impediments in doing what he has said all along he was going to do -- nominate a conservative justice in the mold of Justice (Antonin) Scalia." "But Supreme Court historian David Garrow said Bush 'has to do something other than a white male appellate judge: whether it is a woman, whether it's Hispanic, whether it's someone outside the judicial box.'"...
By Fred Barbash | July 15, 2005; 08:04 AM ET | Email a Comment
Impact of Rehnquist Staying
The consensus of opinion (see previous posts) is that Rehnquist's decision to stay as long as his health permits at once simplifies and complicates the task for the White House. Pres. Bush has only one choice to make now. But it will be harder for him to satisfy all the various constituencies with a single nomination. I suspect that view is too short-term. It is still a strong probability, as many have written, that Bush will have other vacancies to fill during his presidency. Therefore, the White House can legitimately see the first appointment as one in a series and act accordingly. From the standpoint of vote groupings on the court, Rehnquist's departure and replacement by an equally conservative justice would have not changed the direction of the court. The O'Connor vacancy mattered more and still does....
By Fred Barbash | July 15, 2005; 06:27 AM ET | Comments (9)
More on Rehnquist Staying
From David Savage in the Los Angeles Times: "Columnist Robert Novak went so far as to say on CNN last Friday that Rehnquist's retirement would be announced about 5 p.m. that same day, after Bush returned from the Group of Eight meetings in Scotland. Rehnquist was at work in the Supreme Court building, and court officials said they saw no hint that he planned to quit. "Nonetheless, legal activists, congressional staffers and most Washington newsrooms were convinced that the speculation was correct. "Now that Rehnquist has shown that the speculation was wrong, Bush is faced with a clearer choice -- as well as a dilemma. "On the one hand, he knows he can fill only the seat held by O'Connor. He need not juggle two seats that would have been vacant had Rehnquist followed O'Connor into retirement. Many in Washington had expected Bush to appease moderates with O'Connor's replacement and...
By Fred Barbash | July 15, 2005; 06:19 AM ET | Comments (1)
Rehnquist Staying III
From Linda Greenhouse in the New York Times: "The prospect that the scene on his lawn, with its overtones of a ghoulish death watch, would continue all summer was evidently what drove the famously tight-lipped chief justice to issue his statement..... "Even for the Supreme Court, an institution in which secrecy is prized and information is tightly controlled, the events of the past two weeks have been startling. Justice O'Connor informed her colleagues of her decision barely an hour before the public announcement. Her children learned about it from television. On Thursday night, court officials learned of Chief Justice Rehnquist's statement only when reporters began calling to confirm the Associated Press bulletin. It quickly became obvious that the chief justice had taken matters into his own hands."...
By Fred Barbash | July 15, 2005; 06:11 AM ET | Comments (2)
Rehnquist Staying II
From Lyle Deniston in the Supreme Court Nomination blog (an offshot of Tom Goldstein's SCOTUS BLOG) "Chief Justice William Rehnquist's firm declaration Thursday night that he is not retiring.....both eases and complicates President Bush's opportunity to try to start reshaping the Supreme Court. For the time being, at least, the prospect that he will have two seats to fill, not one, has ended. "On the one hand, this will enable the President and his advisers to focus entirely on the type of nominee they want to send to the Senate to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who is retiring. That might allow the selection process -- already underway -- to move along a little more rapidly, and in some ways might make it easier. A considerable amount of uncertainty has been allayed by the Chief Justice's announcement. "On the other hand, the President will not be able to engage in...
By Fred Barbash | July 15, 2005; 05:59 AM ET | Comments (2)
Rehnquist Says He's Staying
"I'm not about to announce my retirement," the chief justice said last night. See Charles Lane and Peter Baker in The Washington Post. "I want to put to rest the speculation and unfounded rumors of my imminent retirement," Rehnquist said. "I am not about to announce my retirement. I will continue to perform my duties as chief justice as long as my health permits." "In a sign that the announcement reflected a spontaneous personal reaction to the rising tide of speculation, Rehnquist released the statement through his family, which contacted the Associated Press shortly before 9 last night -- rather than putting out the news through the court's public information office, as would usually be done," report Lane and Baker in this morning's Post.This is, of course, a remarkable and dramatic moment in the history of the court. More later....
By Fred Barbash | July 15, 2005; 05:43 AM ET | Comments (2)
Report: Rehnquist Released
Wire services and CNN report that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has been released from the hospital....
By Fred Barbash | July 14, 2005; 01:12 PM ET | Email a Comment
Rehnquist Hospitalized
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist is in Arlington Hospital for observation with a fever, the Supreme Court said today. A statement from the court said Rehnquist was taken by ambulance last night and admitted for observation. More as the story develops....
By Fred Barbash | July 13, 2005; 02:43 PM ET | Comments (4)
No Battle Stations Today
Charles Lane, who covers the Supreme Court for The Washington Post, reports: In a sign that Chief Justice William Rehnquist isn't quitting today, the court's public information officer, Kathy L. Arberg is not at battle stations. In fact, she spent two hours between 12 and 2 p.m. sitting in on a forum sponsored by the ACLU--National Capital Area on the recently concluded Supreme Court term. Also, Lane noted that possible nominee John G. Roberts Jr, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, has been out of town since last Friday, teaching in London for a two-week stint. Either he's not going to be nominated soon, or he'll have to do a quick turnaround....
By Lexie Verdon | July 12, 2005; 03:41 PM ET | Email a Comment
Cornyn on Senators Meeting With Bush
The following statement was just issued by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and former Texas Supreme Court justice: "The meeting at the White House on Tuesday is yet another example of the President's unprecedented outreach to the Senate, and to both Democrats and Republicans."The President and his staff have already reached out to 60 senators--60 more than the Constitution requires. My concern, though, is that for some senators and their allies in the liberal interest groups, no amount of consultation will ever be enough. But I would remind them that consultation does not equal co-nomination. The Constitution makes clear that it is the President who must choose the nominee--the Senate's role is to advise and consent on that nominee once he or she has been nominated."...
By Fred Barbash | July 12, 2005; 10:54 AM ET | Comments (6)
Laura Bush Wants a Woman II
President Bush, upon being informed that the first lady, speaking on the "Today" program, said she would like him to appoint a woman to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, says he can't wait to hear this from her in person. "My wife, I talked to her yesterday....Listen, I get her advice all the time. I didn't realize she had put this advice in the press. I can't wait to hear her advice in person when she gets back." See previous post on this subject and on senators visiting White House, about which Bush said: "I did have a good breakfast with four United States senators. I asked their advice" and "how fast could they get to the hearings" once a name goes forward. "My only question to them is what will it take to get a person confirmed by early October. ... We talked about prospective nominees. They have opinions...
By Fred Barbash | July 12, 2005; 10:24 AM ET | Comments (3)
Laura Bush Wants Woman Justice
The first lady told the "Today" show's Ann Curry that she "would really like for him to name another woman." She was speaking from her travels in South Africa. Here is a verbatim excerpt: CURRY: "Let me shift for a moment to a subject that a lot of Americans care a lot about, and that is what will happen in the wake of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor retiring. Do you want your husband to name another woman to the Supreme Court?" BUSH: "Sure, I would really like for him to name another woman. And I admire and respect Sandra Day O'Connor so much. She's been a friend that I've loved seeing whenever I had the chance when I'm in Washington." "But I know that my husband will pick somebody who has a lot of integrity and strength. And...
By Fred Barbash | July 12, 2005; 10:08 AM ET | Comments (1)
Senators at the White House
Senate leaders, GOP and Democrat, met with the President this morning for a first discussion of the confirmation process. Attending were Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa., ) and ranking Judiciary Committee Democrat, Patrick Leahy. The main points: Reid said he was confident a "consensus" nominee would emerge. He did not say why he was so confident. Specter and Leahy urged the president not to choose a nominee from the federal appeals court, on the grounds that someone with "practical" experience would be better. Specter hinted, but did not say explicitly, that the President agreed on that. Frist and others said they assured Bush that a nominee could be approved by the opening of the Court's next term. See below for some excerpts from their comments: REID: "This certainly is a good first or second step. The president has...
By Fred Barbash | July 12, 2005; 10:03 AM ET | Comments (2)
