I have been following the Judge Roberts confirmation hearing. My first since the controversial Clarence Thomas days more than a decade back. Here are a few thoughts that come to mind.
1. At some level these hearings are a farce. No candidate will ever state his position on specific issues. You can't figure the guy out unless he is willing to talk. Since the President nominated him, he is certain to meet his requirements. He is a relatively unknown entity to warrant a filibuster. So what's the point of all this drama anyway?
2. Judge Roberts was very impressive overall in my opinion. He is extremely articulate, very pricise and to the point in his answers, has incredible amount of facts and figures at his finger tips, appeared very deft at avoiding issues, never lost his cool or fell into any traps, and overall seems like a reasonable guy. Its hard to tell if his likely to turn out to be an "activist" judge. Interestingly enough the conservatives are not exactly complaining about him, and this certainly raises suspicions about his true colors!
3. Can't these senators be brief when asking questions? I thought the goal is to try and get the candidate to speak? Time and again, I noticed that the questions were so long winded and the answer very often in contrast was so short!
4. I think it ridiculous to have lifetime appointment for these Judges. Roberts is just 50 and could be there for another 40 years! Why can't other qualified judges be given a shot at the job as well. Ten year term, maybe even 15 years, but more than that I think is completely crazy.
Bush might finally have a victory to celebrate. His move to nominate Judge Roberts as the Chief Justice saved everyone of an extra hearing and the relatively "unknown" nature of the candidate helped expedite the process. The real battle for now will be the Sandra O'Connor replacement.
1. At some level these hearings are a farce. No candidate will ever state his position on specific issues. You can't figure the guy out unless he is willing to talk. Since the President nominated him, he is certain to meet his requirements. He is a relatively unknown entity to warrant a filibuster. So what's the point of all this drama anyway?
2. Judge Roberts was very impressive overall in my opinion. He is extremely articulate, very pricise and to the point in his answers, has incredible amount of facts and figures at his finger tips, appeared very deft at avoiding issues, never lost his cool or fell into any traps, and overall seems like a reasonable guy. Its hard to tell if his likely to turn out to be an "activist" judge. Interestingly enough the conservatives are not exactly complaining about him, and this certainly raises suspicions about his true colors!
3. Can't these senators be brief when asking questions? I thought the goal is to try and get the candidate to speak? Time and again, I noticed that the questions were so long winded and the answer very often in contrast was so short!
4. I think it ridiculous to have lifetime appointment for these Judges. Roberts is just 50 and could be there for another 40 years! Why can't other qualified judges be given a shot at the job as well. Ten year term, maybe even 15 years, but more than that I think is completely crazy.
Bush might finally have a victory to celebrate. His move to nominate Judge Roberts as the Chief Justice saved everyone of an extra hearing and the relatively "unknown" nature of the candidate helped expedite the process. The real battle for now will be the Sandra O'Connor replacement.
No comments:
Post a Comment