"America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."
--Joseph Stalin

Thursday, September 15, 2005

Roberts Hearing: Bush/Roberts 18, Senators 0

Will Malven
9/15/2005

The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the John Roberts nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) resembles not so much the ballgame of Roberts umpire analogy when discussing the proper role of a Justice on the SCOTUS, as a game of homerun derby.

On one side we have the soon to be new Chief Justice Roberts sitting with no notes or props and on the other side we have eighteen Senators the various staff members, and all of their accumulated paper work, notes, letters and the like.  The results, no contest.  For two days now Judge Roberts has taken the Senate Committee to law school.  Each Senator, in his/her turn, has fired their best curveball or fastball only to have it smacked over the fence by a calm and unflappable Judge Roberts.  If there has ever been a more capable and knowledgeable candidate for Justice or Chief Justice in our nation’s history, perhaps Judge Bork rates, I cannot recall him.  I have never been as impressed by a man in all the time I have been watching testimony before a committee whether House or Senate.  His encyclopedic knowledge of most areas of the law, his calm demeanor and his unwavering devotion to the concept that a judge, when he takes on the black robe, ceases to be a person with all of his biases and prejudices and becomes instead an impartial adjudicator responsible only for interpreting how the case is affected by the Constitution and laws, as passed by Congress, confirms Judge Roberts as a man certain not to legislate from the bench.  He is the epitome of a non-activist judge.

As an arch-conservative, I would rather have a judge more outspoken against Roe v. Wade (Right to abortion), Griswald v. Connecticut (Right to privacy), and Wickard v. Fillburn (expansive Commerce Clause interpretation), but I understand the need to duck and weave in answering questions which might affect cases that could come before the SCOTUS.  I personally believe that Griswald was an abominable decision based solely on Douglas’ argument.  I will never agree that the right to privacy can be found contained in penumbras formed by emanations of specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights.  Such convoluted thinking is unworthy of a justice of the SCOTUS.  Roberts stated that he agreed with the Griswald decision, something with which I can’t concur.  That having been said, I believe that Roberts will be one of the great Chief Justices in the history of the SCOTUS.  He has shown himself to be unflappable under fire from the wannabe equals on the Left who, each in their turn, have been shown to be far outclassed by this classy man.  Each in his/her turn has attempted repeatedly to draw him out on the Left’s touchstone issues using all the guile they and their staffs could muster to no avail.  Judge Roberts set the boundaries early on, boundaries much broader than most previous nominees have seen fit to set, and has refused to be drawn out beyond them.  On occasion he has been forced to lecture the Senators about the need to maintain an open and unbiased mind on these issues and to thereby assure the litigants of a fair and impartial evaluation of the facts in a case as they relate to the law.

Again and again, Roberts was admonished that he should consider not just the facts in the case, not be an automaton (the mispronounced word of the day for Democrats), but remember the human side of the case; not forget about his humanity (DeWine (RINO)
Ohio), but to allow his humanity to shine through.  That is, of course, the Liberal model for a “good” Supreme Court Justice, precisely the opposite of what the Justices should be doing.  For Democrats and their Liberal string-pullers, their worst nightmare is that a justice will be seated who will look only at the law and the facts and make his decision on that basis alone.  Even as they decry any thought of ignoring stare decisis as judicial activism, what they are seeking is the worst kind of judicial activist.  Liberals are seeking judges like Douglas, Blackmun, Black, and Ginsberg who believe it is a justice’s job to insert their own belief of what the Founding Fathers and/or Congress should have said if only they’d been enlightened enough, rather than just looking at the law and Constitution as they were written.  They applaud the kind of judicial activism that seeks to understand the laws of foreign nations to “better” judge our own laws (after all we are just lowly Americans who have no appreciation of the finer details of how a “real” justice systems should work).

It has been very amusing to watch the vain attempts of each of the prima donnas of the Left try their wiles on soon to be Justice Roberts.  There was Senator Teddy “the Killer” Kennedy, his puffy red face and shaking hands, evidence of his unabated alcoholism, reading the questions written for him by his staff, rarely looking up from the paper to listen to the responses, and even more rarely daring to look Judge Roberts in the eyes. Then, of course, wannabe President Joe “the Fox” Biden with his meaningless unfelt smile and condescending tone, who at one point on day two got slapped down handily by the candidate in a lecture about the judicial cannons which prevent comment on current cases, and his testimony and what he did and did not state.  Biden continually interrupted Judge Roberts because, of course, it’s all about him, and had to be slapped down repeatedly by Senator Spector for not allowing Roberts to answer Biden’s question.  Each time Biden whined about not having much time when, in fact, he had as much time as every other Senator and chose to spend it in asking long, self-aggrandizing questions because, of course, it’s all about him.  The rest of the Dems were not even exciting enough to discuss.  Well, perhaps Chuck Schumer, who was his usual hateful rude and evil self, but not even he could muster much enthusiasm in his questioning.

It has become fairly evident as I watch the proceedings, that the wind has left the Liberal’s sails as they watch this man deflect and destroy each attack as it comes.  I believe that they have abandoned themselves to the idea that Roberts is going to be the next Chief Justice, and they are now concentrating on sharpening their knives for the next candidate who will be appointed to take what they like to call, the O’Conner seat, a pitiful paean to their wistful desire for another liberal to be seated on the court.  Ultimately this was a tour de force performance by a judge who far outclasses his critics both in knowledge of the law and in demeanor, his inquisitors.  I will be very comfortable with him on the bench.

I stated when all of this began, that although I didn’t know anything about Roberts, I do know President Bush, and I believed and trusted that he would appoint someone precisely as he said he would in the mold of Scalia or Thomas.  Perhaps Roberts falls just short of that, and he will be more in the mold of a young Rehnquist.  That will be fine with me.

Oh yeah, did I mention that it’s all about Biden?


Long Live Our American Republic!!!

No comments:

Post a Comment