Robert's Hearings

I've been listening while working, so I don't get to necessarily hear all of it but I'm getting the feeling the Dem's are slowly going out for blood.

Senator Kennedy was just winding up before the adjourned for a 15-min break.

While they have tripped him up a few times, including Roberts "separate by equal" stance, I still don't think they've gotten down and dirty like I've heard them do before. Hell, the ANWR debates were more heated than this and this is what decides his life-long appointment on the Federal Supreme Court. (I now rescind my comment because Biden dug in.)

At the beginning, Roberts did say he thought Roe v. Wade to be a precedent set by the court in 1973, then again in Casey v. Planned Parenthood. He said these cases shouldn't be touched. Like Lauren said, I'll believe it when I see it. After all, he could just be saying that to please his interviewers and get his ass on the bench.

I'll have to go through and listen again because I got to tune in just as Kennedy was reading something from a few papers, I heard Roberts tell Kennedy his side wasn't shown very well, then Kennedy said, "But these are your words." Why do people (*cough*cough* Cheney, Ashcroft, et al) swear they never said something yet it's been recorded and documented? Geesh.

Senator Spector is referree. Senator Joe Biden is the next Dem to speak (at some point). There are 8 Dem's and 10 Repub's on this committee. What fun!

Almost forgot! You can listen in on CSPAN2 or you can watch highlights on various news channels this evening as well. I don't get any of the good news channels but I can stream!

*Okay, so Grassley (R-IA) is speaking first but he's not doing any questioning but instead reminding everyone that Roberts was voted onto whatever branch he serves now (god, i just can't remember right) unanimously, that he's been candid in answering questions and providing information...and that he (Roberts) is the most qualified for this position in his opinion.

I wonder if some of them Repub's clinch their teeth everytime they have to say "Democratic Society"....

Some quotes made by Roberts:

"Judges operate as Judges when they are confined by the law."; "Judges should not have absolute discretion."; "Judges should interpret the laws, not make them."

He thinks there is no room within a judge-ship for their own values and beliefs: "You don't pay attention (it may be 'follow' here) to your own values and beliefs; you look outside yourself."

Why are we going through this hearing process when we all know he's gonna be confirmed? I just hope he's more moderate than Bush anticipated. After all, it has happened before, just look at O'Connor. Wouldn't that be a kicker?!

**He also believes precedence promotes stability, dependability, credibility and other adjectives/verbs that I can't remember. Roberts has also said he doesn't believe courts should be making laws - you know, like in the Terry Schiavo case were all the courts turned it down but the Senate felt it important enough to meet for a special session.

***Hah! He used the word gender! We feminists have brainwashed him after all! Did you know a courts precedent dictates the approach a higher court would take toward the/a case?

****Biden is speaking and using too much of a baseball metaphor. But! He's dragging out Roberts definition of Unreasonable Search and Seizure. Then he said the new Supreme Court gets to vote and set a precedent for issues the founding fathers never set a strike zone for. (This was said because Roberts has been channeling those founding fathers quotes, seriously.)

"Tacit postulance," a quote from Renhquist. "A rule he was able to infer from the rules set forth by the fore fathers." (I hope I got that right. My ear was already on to the next thing. If not, someone correct me, k?)

Biden directly asked Roberts if he believes a right to privacy is covered under the constitution and more specifically, does it extend to women. Roberts answered, "Yes, under the 14th Admendment." Okay, I've read that 14th Amendment lots and more recently read many cases where violations to the 14th had been invoked. I do not see how the right to privacy is covered here, but hey, that's his interpretation. I like to believe that the right to privacy exists within in the 1st Amendment. I think I might be going crazy. The problem with one mans interpretation is that it might be different when he's on the bench and no longer needs to worry about being confirmed.

(side note: the Dems are much more forceful in their questioning thus far while Repub's are civil and polite about it. If you don't believe me, watch/listen for yourselves.)

They are arguing about a Ginsburg rule that I totally missed the point of. But it's funny how the Senator is pretty much going after him, :). Roberts is doing fancy footwork, not actually answering and Biden just accused him of fillibustering.

Whoah, on to Violence Against Women! "Judge, tell me how a guy beating his wife up in Minnesota is different than a guy in NY in the same situation." hahahahahaha. Roberts had stated at some earlier point that a federal law couldn't be made with regards to violence against women because it varied state-by-state. Yeah. Sure. I point you back to Biden on this one.

I think I need to just stop and let you all listen for yourself or at least read transcripts that will get quotes right, ;).

So okay, Roberts might end up being a shrub puppet after-all. *sigh*