Tuesday, July 19, 2005
The lesson, as always...
...is that I'm an idiot. The President nominated an old ally, Judge John G. Roberts of the DC Circuit.
More importantly, the lesson is that it's easy for both the press and hacks like myself to talk ourselves out of the obvious. When O'Connor retired, Roberts was one of the first names mentioned as a possible successor. And indeed, given his relatively short judicial paper trail, clear credentials as a jurisprudential scholar, and friendly relations with both sides of the aisle, it appears the primary difference between him and Judge Clement is that he has a penis.
Having read more of his work both as a litigant and judge, two comments are necessary:
1) I was too harsh to call him a party hack; his record as a litigant for Hogan & Hartson speaks otherwise. My claim was based more on his work as a solicitor for both Reagan and Bush 41's DOJs.
2) I'm more pleased with this nomination than the potential nod to Judge Luttig (though I find it unfortunate that Judge Roberts went to Harvard twice...yuck).
I'm far more interested in your opinions, though. Is he a good pick? What snags to see in his confirmation? Will we face another judicial showdown, or smooth sailing? If confirmed, what can we expect out of him on the bench?
More importantly, the lesson is that it's easy for both the press and hacks like myself to talk ourselves out of the obvious. When O'Connor retired, Roberts was one of the first names mentioned as a possible successor. And indeed, given his relatively short judicial paper trail, clear credentials as a jurisprudential scholar, and friendly relations with both sides of the aisle, it appears the primary difference between him and Judge Clement is that he has a penis.
Having read more of his work both as a litigant and judge, two comments are necessary:
1) I was too harsh to call him a party hack; his record as a litigant for Hogan & Hartson speaks otherwise. My claim was based more on his work as a solicitor for both Reagan and Bush 41's DOJs.
2) I'm more pleased with this nomination than the potential nod to Judge Luttig (though I find it unfortunate that Judge Roberts went to Harvard twice...yuck).
I'm far more interested in your opinions, though. Is he a good pick? What snags to see in his confirmation? Will we face another judicial showdown, or smooth sailing? If confirmed, what can we expect out of him on the bench?
Comments:
<< Home
I thought you were a bit harsh in your "party hack" comment immediately following the nomination announcement. It appears that while he is likely a solid conservative, personally speaking, it also appears that he has more than enough education, experience, and temperance to be a Supreme Court Justice. I can always get behind people who have the necessary CV - I'm just glad people are finally catching on to the fact that just because someone is hired to brief on an issue, it doesn't mean that person agrees with his/her brief.
Post a Comment
<< Home
