Home » Political » (Juris) Dr. Roberts

(Juris) Dr. Roberts

15 September 2005

(Juris) Doctor Robert(s), you’re a new and better man,

He helps you to understand,

He does ev’rything he can, (Juris) Doctor Robert(s).

I’ve been listening to the confirmation hearings for Judge John Roberts for the position of chief justice of the United States Supreme Court, and it’s very interesting to me. The position of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is one of the most important jobs in the US Government, and because Roberts is so young (50), he’s likely to be in the job for at least 35 years, on average. So, respectably, everyone is taking this very very seriously. I do not believe that anyone is in doubt that John Roberts is very likely the most intelligent, best researched and most highly skilled man to come before review for this position. What appears to be in question, is Judge Roberts’ moral stance, and how or whether his particular ethical responses would affect his judgments on the Supreme Court.

He’s been on stage and had the lights and questions pointed at him for the last three days, and while I am not by any means a professional political analyst, I am getting a very positive feeling about him, which most likely differs from many of my more liberal friends. I guess, this is where I show myself to be more conservative in the literal sense, but I really like what I’ve heard from Roberts’ own mouth about his commitment to the rule of law, and to doing his job and nothing outside of the definition of his job. Many on the right are trying to get to the moral core of Roberts and find out what he believes is right and wrong, with the assumption that on the basis of his sense of personal justice, these opinions would determine the outcome of his decisions in the court. I think that this is a sensible concern, and I’ve been happy that these questions are being asked. Nonetheless, I am really liking what I’m hearing from Judge Roberts, though it’s not what the Democratic Senators are trying to get out of him. I like what I’m hearing, mostly because it’s his response not just to the Dems, but also the Reps. on issues of moral opinion. Some might say that he’s avoiding and evading placing any personal judgement out, but to me he’s holding to his highest level of moral dedication — that of allowing the rule of law to be his guide, and to not be persuaded by personal opinion in his decision making — to be as objective as personally able. While in an ideal world where the Democrats own the house, senate and presidency I might hope for a liberal activist Chief Justice, that’s not the world we live in. We live in a world where the Republicans own the game, and will more than likely be able to push through any positions, appointments or legislation they wish. We should be overjoyed, thrilled that they’ve given us a candidate whose highest ethical position is to be objective and to leave lawmaking to the legislature. Really, this is a boon — we’re being given someone… objective and impartial… (if we can believe him at his word) to lead the court whose job it is to be impartial and objective, and to interpret the intentions of the constitution and the laws of this country. The argument against Roberts is that he lacks a moral compass, and some on the left are saying for this reason he’s not the right person for the job in our day and times. Instead, I’m of the opinion that Roberts shows a higher level of moral direction, and will not be swayed by political or personal opinion. He believes in the legal and judicial system, and can restore integrity to the courts — an integrity that was lost when the Supreme Court overstepped their bounds in 2000 and took away a state’s rights to follow their own constitution and its mandate to hold and complete a full manual recount of any election that was closer than a specific margin, and in doing so put a man into the presidency that was not voted into office, but was appointed by the courts. I have a strong feeling that if Judge Roberts were presiding, that case would have never been touched by the Supreme Court in the first place, and would have been kicked back down to the state supreme court where it belonged. It’s just a hunch, and as I said, I’m not a political expert. But, everything John Roberts is saying seems to back up my impression.

In the days and weeks to follow, a decision will be made to allow or deny Judge Roberts the position of Chief justice of the United States Supreme court. If he is denied confirmation, I personally fear who the next candidate may be. Will they be as intelligent? Will they be as committed to objectivity, or will they carry a hidden agenda? One thing is certain, with the extreme government we have right now, it’s not going to be a political moderate. Personally, I think Roberts may be a snafu the administration may not be prepared for. I think they are deceived and think they’re getting someone who’s prepared to push through their agenda. I think Roberts is uncontrollable, and will do his job faithfully. I’m prepared for the possibility that I’m wrong, but in my gut I feel that I am right.

In a very real way, it’s already out of my hands. I’m a spectator in a battle whose outcome is already determined. All I can do is sit back and watch.

Be Sociable, Share!