Constructive gadfly
Published on September 18, 2005 By stevendedalus In Politics

Chief Justice Roberts — unquestionably he will be — though a conservative and if true to his word that law is dispassionate should not cause a revolution or worse devolution of the Court. He did, however, express a cunning candor that revealed deceptively evasive responses and for that reason will not overwhelmingly be confirmed by the Senate. When a nominee displays brilliance and in a deferential way, there is no cause for the opposing party to filibuster and chance looking like spoil sports. Tradition has been that a president is entitled to his choice, provided the candidate’s judicial philosophy does not egregiously revisit with intent to roll back self evident law of the land.

That Roberts is Catholic is no reason to look upon him skeptically anymore than a justice of any faith: a rational justice is supposed to relegate divine law to individual conscience that in no way should impede deliberations of secular law, or weaken the separation of church and state.

  

Copyright © 2005 Richard R. Kennedy All rights reserved. Revised: September 18, 2005.

http://stevendedalus.joeuser.com


Comments
on Sep 18, 2005
I think people fail to question the motives of Senators. No doubt a few of less-than-conservative bent would be more than happy if a conservative justice had to excuse himself because of questions they pressed him to answer.

For everyone that views his silence with suspicion, you'd think there'd be someone else who would remark on their obvious attempt to land-mine his future service. They seem to be getting a pass, though.
on Sep 18, 2005
Oh, the conservative side has definitely taken to task the questions from the other side--as it should be. I agree that had Roberts directly answered on Roe v Wade, and were it to be revisted, the dems would surely demand he recuse hinmself.