Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Roberts Insists He'll Respect Precedent

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:13 PM
Original message
Roberts Insists He'll Respect Precedent
<<SNIP>>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5185567,00.html

Roberts Insists He'll Respect Precedent
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - John Roberts pledged Tuesday to respect established rulings if confirmed to the Supreme Court, saying judges must recognize that their role is ``not to solve society's problems.''

The questionnaire, numbering nearly 100 pages and released by the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, provides Roberts' responses to a broad array of questions, including his work history, political ties and views on judicial activism.

``Precedent plays an important role in promoting the stability of the legal system,'' Roberts wrote. ``A sound judicial philosophy should reflect recognition of the fact that the judge operates within a system of rules developed over the years by other judges equally striving to live up to the judicial oath.''

At the same time, the former Republican attorney said that ``judges must be constantly aware that their role, while important, is limited.''

<</SNIP>>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yeah, Precedent Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lateo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. Ashcroft made similar promises...
Color me skeptical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. ... until he sets new precedent, that is.
Pinocchio, your nose is growing ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. He Already Lied...
He lied about not belonging to the Federalist Society. And now he wants us to trust him? More vague statements by the Right Wing: "Precedent".

Whatever the hell that is supposed to mean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
5. But when was this questionaire completed?
Was it done for his nomination to the circuit court? If so, that's not news. He said a similar thing when he testified before Congress.

The excuse I've heard about that is that as a Circuit court judge, he would have to follow established law. It's different as a SC judge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. I wonder ...

Does this include the precedent set in such things as Scott v Sanford, Plessy v Ferguson?

Obviously the statement has no meaning. Lawyers and judges pick and choose which precedent they find more compelling, in support of their point of view or that of their client, all the time, and with numerous contradictory precedents on the books, he can say such a thing with a perfectly straight face and not have to work at it. There's also the word "respect." One can respect precedent and still not agree with it quite easily.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. How about the precedent of bu$h vs. Gore?
Oh, wait, Cheney's duck hunting partner said that was a one-time-only decision.

Never mind :silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
7. Federalist Society; do everything possible to keep him off the bench
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelvin Mace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
8. Vichy Dems
will use this "assurance" as the reason they vote for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Inland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
9. Like Bush respects our men and women in uniform.
Edited on Tue Aug-02-05 07:30 PM by Inland
A couple of nice words as it is buried.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samsingh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
10. sorry - i don't believe repugs anymore
many in power have lied and abused their power.

they are vile, filthy creatures that are a blight on democracy.

yes, i am namecalling because they call us names, and then are too afraid to be confronted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HockeyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
11. Roberts and Operation Resure
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
journalist3072 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
13. My response to Mr. Roberts....
You say the role of judges is "not to solve society's problems." I wonder where we would be as a society today, if the Supreme Court that overturned Plessy V. Ferguson decided not to solve society's problems. I wonder where we would be today, if that Supreme Court had not ruled that separate but equal was inherently 'unequal."

I would argue that judges are called to solve some of society's problems sometimes, especially when justice has not been done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tyedyeto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
14. Precedent when it comes down to Roe v. Wade?
I doubt if precedent will have anything to do with his ruling in that case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertarctor Donating Member (831 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-02-05 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
15. Roberts "respecting precedent" has as much veracity as ...
Edited on Tue Aug-02-05 10:06 PM by robertarctor
1) The check is in the mail.

2) I won't cum in your mouth.

3) It's only a cold sore.

And, per upthread, Roberts already lied. "Federalist Society? Um, what's that?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC