Roberts Vows to Apply Laws, Not Make Them, on Top Court; Judges Are Like Umpires, He Tells Senators at Hearing
Washington Saying that he has “no agenda” and “no platform,” Supreme Court nominee John Roberts told senators Monday that he believes in a modest federal bench that applies laws rather than creates them.
“Judges and justices are servants of the law, not the other way around. Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules; they apply them,” Roberts said on the first day of hearings on his nomination as the 17th chief justice of the United States.
Roberts’ economical opening statement it consumed just more than 6 minutes was the first chance for the American public to get more than a fleeting sense of the man who senators predicted Monday could be the most important justice in a generation or more.
In his promise to judge with caution, restraint and an open mind, Roberts struck themes that for very different reasons have appeal to both sides in the long-running judicial wars over nominees.
Conservatives have long accused the courts of arrogantly “legislating” from the bench. Liberals, if they are to get a conservative justice, would like one who is cautious about overturning precedents such as the right to an abortion.
Roberts seemed to allude to both concerns in his comments to the 18-member Senate Judiciary Committee, which includes Wisconsin Democrats Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold.
“The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules. But it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ball game to see the umpire,” he said, speaking without a text.
“Judges have to have the humility to recognize that they operate within a system of precedent, shaped by other judges equally striving to live up to the judicial oath. And judges have to have the modesty to be open in the decisional process to the considered views of their colleagues on the bench.”
The panel is to begin questioning Roberts today. President Bush has nominated the federal appeals judge to replace the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist, for whom Roberts once served as a law clerk.
Before Roberts spoke, he listened as senators delivered their own comments, which veered from his nomination to the proper role of the court to the nation’s polarized political landscape to the lessons of Hurricane Katrina.
Roberts heard senators from both sides repeatedly cite his youth (50) and potential long service in describing the stakes involved in his confirmation.
“You are obviously very talented, and you also look healthy,” Feingold joked.
Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) speculated that Roberts could serve until 2040.
Be candid, Democrats say
Roberts heard praise from both sides for his qualifications, skills and intellect. But he also heard senators air their longstanding partisan differences over past court decisions, and over what sort of questions Roberts should have to answer this week.
Democrats called on Roberts to speak fully and candidly about his views.
“Evasions, avoidance and hiding behind legal jargon simply will not suffice,” Kohl said. “We need and deserve to know what is in your mind and in your heart.”
Republicans urged Roberts to avoid answering direct questions about his views on legal issues.
“Don’t take the bait,” John Cornyn of Texas said. “Decline to answer any question that you would feel would compromise your duty to do your job.”
Roberts also heard senators from both parties complain pointedly about the modern-day court, about decisions upsetting to liberals and conservatives, and about the court’s perceived encroachment upon congressional authority in its propensity to strike down legislation.
The hearing took place in the historic Caucus Room of the Russell Senate Office Building, which was the venue for hearings in 1912 on the Titanic sinking, in 1973 on the Watergate burglary and in 1987 on the Iran-contra scandal.
Packing the room were Roberts’ extended family, a gallery of spectators rotated in and out of the chamber, and scores of reporters and photographers.
The media throng notwithstanding, the Roberts debate has been clearly overshadowed in Washington and nationwide by the Katrina disaster. In fact, in their statements Monday, several Democrats sought to tie the disaster to the confirmation debate, citing the catastrophe befalling low-income residents of New Orleans to buttress arguments about the need for the court to promote “equal justice” and opportunity.
There is a widespread expectation here that the Senate will confirm Roberts easily, barring any revelations about his past legal work or surprises at the hearings.
Memos from ’80s
But it remains to be seen how many Democratic votes Roberts will receive, and many Democrats on Monday criticized memos Roberts wrote in the 1980s while working for President Ronald Reagan’s Justice Department.
“In memo after memo, his writings were highly ideological and sometimes dismissive of the views of others,” Feingold said.
“I do, however, recognize that this is a different time, and he has been nominated to play a different kind of role than he played in those early Reagan years. So, frankly, I will be looking for a somewhat different John Roberts than the John Roberts of 1985.”
As did other Democrats, Feingold criticized the Bush administration for not providing additional documents relating to Roberts’ service under the first President Bush in the late ’80s and early ’90s.
“The refusal gives rise to a reasonable inference that the administration has something to hide here,” Feingold said. “The administration has done this nominee no service by maintaining its intransigent position.”
Committee Republicans, meanwhile, took turns lauding Roberts’ background, intellect and approach to the law.
“The people rightly demand judges who follow, not make, law,” said Jeff Sessions of Alabama.
“And from everything I have seen and from what I have read, Judge Roberts, you are just the man to fill that need straight from central casting.”
Roberts told senators that if confirmed, he would “be vigilant to protect the independence and integrity of the Supreme Court, and I will work to ensure that it upholds the rule of law and safeguards those liberties that make this land one of endless possibilities for all Americans.”
He also said: “I have no agenda, but I do have a commitment. If I am confirmed, I will confront every case with an open mind. I will fully and fairly analyze the legal arguments that are presented. I will be open to the considered views of my colleagues on the bench. And I will decide every case based on the record, according to the rule of law, without fear or favor, to the best of my ability. And I will remember that it’s my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat.”
ON JSONLINE
Go to www.jsonline.com/links/roberts for updates during the day and
transcripts from the Roberts hearings.
Copyright 2005, Journal Sentinel Inc. All rights reserved. (Note: This notice does not apply to those news items already copyrighted and received through wire services or other media.)