Eyes Left

JUDICIARY DEMOCRATS FRACTURED ON ROBERTS

John Roberts is closer to his coveted position as Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.  The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 13-5 to endorse his confirmation.  The committee is comprised of ten Republicans and eight Democrats.  The votes of the Republicans were completely predictable - indeed, it would be surprising if any GOP Senator votes "NO" on the Senate floor - but the Democratic vote tally was extremely disappointing.  Ranking Democrat Patrick Leahy (Vermont) and Democrats Russell Feingold and Herb Kohl of Wisconsin voted "YES" on the Roberts nomination.  Leahy is a reliably liberal Senator with a calm demeanor.  Feingold has this irritating habit of supporting controversial Republican Justice Department and judicial nominations - he supported the confirmation of John Ashcroft as Attorney General - but he is a steadfast liberal with 12+ years of distinguished Senate service.  Feingold may run for President in 2008.  Kohl, the other Wisconsin Senator, owns a nationwide chain of grocery stores and clothing stores - he is no "rock the boat" liberal.  Kohl's vote on Roberts was not completely unexpected.  Three of the eight Judiciary Committee Democrats voted to support Roberts, even though numerous liberal Democratic interest groups (Americans United for Separation of Church and State, League of Conservation Voters, National Abortion Rights Action League, Moveon.org) and Democratic National Chair Howard Dean urged a "NO" vote. 

Democrats claimed that Roberts did not answer questions with enough specificity.  They are right.  But Roberts  already expressed his true feelings on the great issues of the day when he voluntarily became Rehnquist's law clerk and when he voluntarily joined the Reagan and Bush Justice Departments.  He knew that Rehnquist was an ultraconservative, and he knew that the Reagan and Bush I  Administration were ideologically conservative.  Roberts urged the destruction of Roe vs Wade in legal briefs submitted to the Supreme Court, he is an orthodox traditionalist Catholic, and his wife is on the board of "Feminists For Lilfe", which advocates the abolition of abortion rights.  Roberts  has argued 39 cases before the Supreme Court.  In most instances, Roberts spoke for the "rightwing" position - ..i.e, overturning a binding arbitrationemployment agreement by seeking the termination of a coal company truck driver who tested positive for marijuana...endorsing "mountain top blast" coal mining where the top of a mountain is destroyed to reach the coal with the resulting contamination of nearby rivers and streams, etc.  We KNOW Roberts' views.  His public record shows his private views!

Yes, Roberts is personally attractive and affable.  He loves his wife, his children, and his neighbors.  He is unfailingly polite and gracious.  But those qualities do not justify a lifetime appointment as Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. 

Yes, Roberts is "only" replacing Rehnquist - a conservative is replacing a conservative.  There is no net ideological loss - yet.  But the Supreme Court is becoming a more dangerous place - America's liberties hang in the balance.  Unless Democrats grow some unified spine - which would take a "second coming of Christ" divine intervention -  (all 45 Democrats vote "NO"), Bush should be able to place an avowedly rightwing jurist in the O'Connor seat.  There are disquieting rumors that liberal Justice John Stevens (85 years old) may soon retire, and Bush would seek to replace Stevens with an ideological conservative.  Given today's pathetic Senate (55 Republicans and 45 Democrats - with nearly every Republican an ideological conservative or Bush loyalist and 10+ "pragmatic" or "centrist" Democrats), an ideologically conservative nominee to replace Stevens would be confirmed.  We can only hope that Stevens can somehow hold out until 2007. 

|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this