( Post a new comment )
From:thorion
Date:2005-09-12 09:40 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Интересно, да. И финальный анализ - похоже, что так оно и будет =(
Кстати, а второй кандидат уже известен?
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-12 09:43 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Нет пока. Молчат...
Бушу не до того, по видимости:)
From:thorion
Date:2005-09-12 09:51 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Тоже верно. Тем более, что спешить ему некуда - это кресло никуда от него не убежит.
From:igorlord
Date:2005-09-12 10:29 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I'm very affraid that Bush will wait till Roberts in approved till he nominates someone ultra-conservative on the Court.
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-12 10:42 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Робертс это довольно неприятно, но это не худший вариант, учитывая, кого он заменяет. Если Буш предложит вместо О'Коннорс ультраконсерватора, будем молиться, чтобы было как с Блэкмуном.
Просто удивительно, до чего некоторые люди меняются with job security:)
From:saul_paradise
Date:2005-09-12 11:42 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Renquist bezuslovno OCHEN' konservativen. No on byl konservatorom staroi' formacii. Menya kuda bol'she pugaut konservatory po obrazu i podobiu Busha - naprimer, Jay Bybee from the 9th Circuit.
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-13 02:12 am (UTC)
(Link)
А что это за Джей такой?
From:saul_paradise
Date:2005-09-13 03:03 am (UTC)
(Link)
on rabotal v Office of Legal Counsel do togo, kak stal sud'ei v 9-m federal'nom okruzhnom sude.

http://sfattorney.typepad.com/law/2005/09/naked_assertion.html
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-13 04:16 am (UTC)
(Link)
Господи, какая гадость:(
Судья, называется! Не хуже этой дуры Грин из Пятого округа...
From:ex_increp708
Date:2005-09-13 04:06 am (UTC)
(Link)
Да, больше всего стоит опасаться Борка в овечей шкуре.
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-13 04:14 am (UTC)
(Link)
Кой черт овечьей:( Уже по совокупности выраженного - минимум шакальей...
From:saul_paradise
Date:2005-09-12 11:08 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Frankly, I think he is getting confirmed.

He is conservative to boot, but I don't know how that's a disqualification. I have not yet seen anything about his positions that would make Robert similar to the very extreme Judge Bork. I don't recall any other Supreme Court nominee in recent memory getting rejected for political views - usually, recent nominees failed due to lack of qualifications or admitting to trying pot:)

I do see a bad precedent in getting overtly ideological in the confirmation process. What happens when there is a Democratic (or any other party) nominee for the Supreme Court? Does a Republican-controlled Congress (if it stays that way) get to reject them b/c the candidate does not fit into their idea of mainstream liberalism?:)

It's a difficult line to tow...
From:umom_ne_poniat
Date:2005-09-12 11:33 pm (UTC)
(Link)
It's almost certain that he's getting confirmed, there's no real opposition to him, and it's Bush's second term; I'm quite certain the second nomination will be equally conservative. It's truly bad when all three branches of the federal government are controlled by the same party, as will probably happen with two conservatives likely being appointed to the previously moderate court (which still voted to give Bush the presidency, but whatever.) What does it say about the state of US democracy?
From:saul_paradise
Date:2005-09-12 11:37 pm (UTC)
(Link)
well, I do not like a lot of Roberts' views, but I have not yet seen grounds to reject him. He is certainly qualified, considering some past Supreme Court Justices (like the late Chief Justice Warren) had no judicial experience.

As for the rest, you just articulated a position that the Democratic Party should be advocating in 2006 midterm elections. I am not a registered Democrat, but I do think it's bad to have one party in control of all three branches. Hopefully, the ship rites itself out next year.

From:umom_ne_poniat
Date:2005-09-12 11:46 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I agree he is sufficiently qualified, but my problem is the political aspect of the nomination, not the professional one: being a Supreme Court justice is very much a political position as well as a judicial one, and political grounds are a more than sufficient basis for rejection of candidates. Ah well, hopefully you're right and the balance is eventually restored without lasting damage.
From:saul_paradise
Date:2005-09-12 11:51 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I don't agree that political aspect of the nomination is sufficient to disqualify, unless the candidate expresses radical views on the par with those of Bork. I mean, if a candidate gets up there and indicates, for example, that in his view, Supreme Court is not the last word in constitutional interpretation, or that
the 14th amendment should be interpreted as it stood at the time of Plessy v. Ferguson, that's a different story. But I have not heard Roberts express those views.

Once you open up the political can of worms, you cannot close it for all subsequent candidates, even if your party gets control of Congress.

From:umom_ne_poniat
Date:2005-09-13 12:00 am (UTC)
(Link)
There is a reason why the President, an eminently political figure, chooses the nominee, and why the Senate, an eminently political institution, votes on the nominee: it is because the nomination is inherently political, and therefore the political views of nominees are considered as crucial factors when the Senators vote on them. I don't think that political can of worms was ever closed, nominations were always political and politicized, with the acrimonius debates about them based not on their professional qualities as much as on their politics; debates on personal/professional qualities have always been smoke screens for debates about politics for political reasons.
From:saul_paradise
Date:2005-09-13 02:16 pm (UTC)
(Link)
if one concedes that the nomination / advise & consent process is overtly political, then two things are probably true. One - Roberts is a shoe-in. The Republicans look to have the votes. Two - we would get all kinds of crappy nominees, so long as one party is able to ram them through on a party-line vote. I don't think that would bode well for the court or the country.

So, for the institutional sake at least, I don't think this process should be too politicized.
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-13 02:14 am (UTC)
(Link)
Maybe because he avoided expressing any views.
I don't like him - темная лошадка.
From:saul_paradise
Date:2005-09-13 03:02 am (UTC)
(Link)
well, when the test is OVERTLY political, the President is going to look for candidates without the proven track record. I am not sure that it would be a better outcome for the Court.

I don't particularly like him, either. He is waaay too "sweet" for someone who was a federal court of appeals judge, has clerked for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, worked for the Solicitor General, and did Supreme Court advocacy for a snobby private law firm. Those are all positions, in which one does not usually advance far by being nice and sweet and apolitical.

But the minute he is disqualified simply because he espouses conservative views, we open the door to all future candidates being grilled by the Congress in the same way. The ramification for the future of the Court would be staggering.

I am just hoping he is another Blackmun or White (in reverse).
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-13 03:52 am (UTC)
(Link)
Don't think so. Blackmun seemed an honest person. Robert loks like an actor. I do not trust him. He looks like one of those people who would not steal your money because they value their bar license and not because it is wrong.
From:saul_paradise
Date:2005-09-13 04:26 am (UTC)
(Link)
you'd be surprised how many people in government fail that test:)
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-13 04:41 am (UTC)
(Link)
I know, it's just... I feel bad distrusting a Chief Justice... If he is honest because he has to, he will stop, when he does not have to anymore:( He did not strike me as a person with principles, he looks like someone watching the wind very carefully
From:ex_increp708
Date:2005-09-13 12:27 am (UTC)
(Link)
Senatorial Courtesy не работает для Supreme Court. Остальные - из области фантастики :(
From:ikadell
Date:2005-09-13 02:15 am (UTC)
(Link)
Ладно тебе. Это реальные причины по которым отказывали реальным людям. Не веришь, что Робертсу откажут по ним? Ты не одинок:)
From:ex_increp708
Date:2005-09-13 02:48 am (UTC)
(Link)
т.е. все-таки это "невозможные" сценарии :)
 
?

Log in

No account? Create an account