It turns out that John Roberts, Jr. will not be another middle-aged white guy on the Supreme Court. Yeah, Roberts is a middle-aged white guy; but, in fact, the Court doesn't have any others. Roberts will be joining a Court with one (middle-aged) black guy, a white woman (in her 70s), and six more white guys each of 'em old enough to collect full benefits from Social Security. So you can see this nomination as real progress in the direction of diversity on the Supreme Court.
What more to say? He's apparently a very good lawyer. He's a pillar of the Federalist Society and the Washington conservative establishment, described by a friend as “as conservative as you can get.” But he's spent the key years of his professional career either in the (Reagan) Solicitor General's office, where the positions in the briefs he submitted didn't necessarily reflect his personal opinions, or as a litigator at Hogan and Hartson, where the positions in the briefs he submitted … didn't necessarily reflect his personal opinions. So he's got no paper trail.
He'll be confirmed, but there'll be fireworks first. How Appealing reminds us that during Roberts's last Senate Judiciary hearing, Orrin Hatch took the position that fellow Judiciary Committee member Charles Schumer was asking Roberts “dumbass questions” (and Roberts, for what it's worth, didn't answer them). Expect more of the same.
CORRECTION: I made an error, above, in describing Roberts's bio. While he spent four years in the White House Counsel's Office under Reagan, his stint as Principal Deputy Solicitor General was under Bush I.
You really think his confirmation will be a slam dunk? I think the democrats have their mouthes set to “whine.” Watch them call this guy everything but a baby killer…
John
My sources suggest that his wife recommended him for the job.
Yes, slam-dunk. There’s nothing to peel off moderate Republicans (if that term isn’t an oxymoron these days …), and a few accommodating Democrats can certainly be found to break any filibuster in this case. Shows something (I’m not sure what) that a few days of posturing is considered a high price against 20 – 30 years of court policy influence.
Is Roe v. Wade gone yet?
Lol. I think Dems aren’t the only ones “whining” if we take into consideration those (present company exempt) whining about said (alleged) whining.
The idea now is not to overturn Roe (Casey) but let various regulations linger and thus chip away, especially as to “partial birth” abortions, those involving minors, “medical” regulations that only apply to abortion, areas with one clinic, those where even if you are raped you won’t be able to get funding if you are poor, regulations on army bases, etc. See, (Jack Balkan) Balkinization for the general idea.
He’s apparently not a member of the Federalist Society, either, however much he might have the same outlook.
Apparently not; at least I can say that better-informed people than I got it wrong too.
Turns out he was on the steering committee for the Federalist Society’s Washington DC chapter . . . He says he “has no recollection” of it.