The Future of a Fair-Minded Court Are in Grave Danger
GLBT civil rights groups are voicing concern over the nomination of John G. Roberts to the US Supreme Court.
President Bush Tuesday night went on national television to announce he was nominating Roberts to the Court.
The vacancy on the Supreme Court stems from the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The appointment of a conservative tips the balance on the court to the right. That Roberts is just 50 means he is likely to remain on the bench for 20 or more years.
Roberts currently sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. He was appointed to that position in 2003 by President Bush.
Roberts attended Harvard College and Harvard Law School and was a clerk for Supreme Court Justice William H. Rehnquist.
A conservative and longtime Republican, Roberts served as Deputy Solicitor General. In 1990, he argued in favor of a government regulation that banned abortion-related counseling by federally-funded family planning programs. His brief top the court contained a note that the Bush administration's belief that Roe v. Wade should be overruled.
"With the Roberts nomination, the right to privacy and the future of a fair-minded Court are in grave danger," Joe Solmonese, President, Human Rights Campaign told 365Gay.com.
"Judge Roberts has disputed the right to privacy laid out in Roe v. Wade, and urged that the case be overruled. Reversing Roe could undermine fundamental rights to privacy and liberty that are the legal underpinning for the freedom of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans.
"Judge Roberts has advocated for prayer in public schools and for weakening the wall between church and state," Solmonese noted. "He should make clear whether or not he would distort religion for misuse as a proxy for discrimination. Americans deserve a justice who will uphold the separation of church and state.
"The unique powers of the Supreme Court, including the power to revisit previous Supreme Court decisions, mean that Judge Roberts’ record should be subject to rigorous inspection," said Solmonese.
Lambda Legal, which is fighting lawsuits in several states on behalf of same-sex couples seeking to marry also expressed concerns.
"We don't have a position yet on John Roberts yet, but there are troubling things in his record that we need to take a careful look at," Michael Adams, director of education for Lambda Legal told 365Gay.com
Adams noted that Roberts' position on Roe v. Wade was particularly troubling since it was one of the precedents the court took into consideration in overturning the Texas sodomy law in 2003.
The American Civil Liberties Union also said it was concerned about the nomination calling for a through examination of Roberts' personal positions on abortion and gay rights.
"The Supreme Court has played a pivotal role in advancing freedom," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director.
"Without the Supreme Court, the South would still be segregated, illegal abortions would be claiming thousands of lives, the indigent would have no right to a lawyer, and lesbian and gay Americans could be imprisoned for their private sexual conduct."
"The stakes could not be higher," Romero added.
The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force called for a thorough investigation of Roberts background.
"In exercising its constitutional 'advise and consent' function, the Senate must take the time necessary to thoroughly review and evaluate Roberts' commitment to individual rights and equal justice under the law, including his record and thinking about civil rights, the right to privacy and the reach of Congressional power under the Constitution," said NGLTF Executive Director Matt Foreman.
"We especially call upon our allies in the Senate to determine whether Judge Roberts subscribes to the holdings of Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas , among other cases, and will affirm that the civil rights and privacy rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans are protected by the Constitution.
"And only if Judge Roberts meets these critical standards of qualification, judicial philosophy, fairness, independence and a dedication to protecting the rights of all under the Constitution, should the Senate vote to confirm his nomination to the court," Foreman said.
Although there is little on the record to indicate how he would vote on LGBT issues, Roberts received bipartisan support as a nominee to the federal bench.
Roberts' nomination is the president's first chance to place a justice on the high court and he may not have as easy a time in confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court.
"All questions are legitimate," New York Democrat and Judiciary Committee member Charles E. Schumer said earlier this month. "What is your view on Roe vs. Wade? What is your view on gay marriage?"
Other Democrats on the Judiciary Committee agree that all issues, including same-sex marriage, should be put to a nominee for the high court. They include Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Joseph Biden of Delaware.
And, Democrats are not discounting using a filibuster to sink a nominee they think too extreme. Democrats have been bracing for a showdown over the Supreme Court for more than a year.
In May they agreed to allow three Bush judicial nominees to appeals courts to go to a vote in return for Republicans abandoning legislation that would have prevented the use of a filibuster.
The president said he wants the nomination confirmed before the Supreme Court begins its fall session in October.
Among the issues the court will consider when the justices return to work October 3 is a legal challenge to the Solomon Law which allows the government to withhold federal funds from universities that bar military recruiters. Some universities have refused to allow recruiters on campuses because of 'don't ask, don't tell, the military's ban on openly gay people serving in the armed forces.
via 365gay.com
Posted by Bryan Harding
President Bush Tuesday night went on national television to announce he was nominating Roberts to the Court.
The vacancy on the Supreme Court stems from the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The appointment of a conservative tips the balance on the court to the right. That Roberts is just 50 means he is likely to remain on the bench for 20 or more years.
Roberts currently sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. He was appointed to that position in 2003 by President Bush.
Roberts attended Harvard College and Harvard Law School and was a clerk for Supreme Court Justice William H. Rehnquist.
A conservative and longtime Republican, Roberts served as Deputy Solicitor General. In 1990, he argued in favor of a government regulation that banned abortion-related counseling by federally-funded family planning programs. His brief top the court contained a note that the Bush administration's belief that Roe v. Wade should be overruled.
"With the Roberts nomination, the right to privacy and the future of a fair-minded Court are in grave danger," Joe Solmonese, President, Human Rights Campaign told 365Gay.com.
"Judge Roberts has disputed the right to privacy laid out in Roe v. Wade, and urged that the case be overruled. Reversing Roe could undermine fundamental rights to privacy and liberty that are the legal underpinning for the freedom of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans.
"Judge Roberts has advocated for prayer in public schools and for weakening the wall between church and state," Solmonese noted. "He should make clear whether or not he would distort religion for misuse as a proxy for discrimination. Americans deserve a justice who will uphold the separation of church and state.
"The unique powers of the Supreme Court, including the power to revisit previous Supreme Court decisions, mean that Judge Roberts’ record should be subject to rigorous inspection," said Solmonese.
Lambda Legal, which is fighting lawsuits in several states on behalf of same-sex couples seeking to marry also expressed concerns.
"We don't have a position yet on John Roberts yet, but there are troubling things in his record that we need to take a careful look at," Michael Adams, director of education for Lambda Legal told 365Gay.com
Adams noted that Roberts' position on Roe v. Wade was particularly troubling since it was one of the precedents the court took into consideration in overturning the Texas sodomy law in 2003.
The American Civil Liberties Union also said it was concerned about the nomination calling for a through examination of Roberts' personal positions on abortion and gay rights.
"The Supreme Court has played a pivotal role in advancing freedom," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director.
"Without the Supreme Court, the South would still be segregated, illegal abortions would be claiming thousands of lives, the indigent would have no right to a lawyer, and lesbian and gay Americans could be imprisoned for their private sexual conduct."
"The stakes could not be higher," Romero added.
The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force called for a thorough investigation of Roberts background.
"In exercising its constitutional 'advise and consent' function, the Senate must take the time necessary to thoroughly review and evaluate Roberts' commitment to individual rights and equal justice under the law, including his record and thinking about civil rights, the right to privacy and the reach of Congressional power under the Constitution," said NGLTF Executive Director Matt Foreman.
"We especially call upon our allies in the Senate to determine whether Judge Roberts subscribes to the holdings of Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas , among other cases, and will affirm that the civil rights and privacy rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans are protected by the Constitution.
"And only if Judge Roberts meets these critical standards of qualification, judicial philosophy, fairness, independence and a dedication to protecting the rights of all under the Constitution, should the Senate vote to confirm his nomination to the court," Foreman said.
Although there is little on the record to indicate how he would vote on LGBT issues, Roberts received bipartisan support as a nominee to the federal bench.
Roberts' nomination is the president's first chance to place a justice on the high court and he may not have as easy a time in confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court.
"All questions are legitimate," New York Democrat and Judiciary Committee member Charles E. Schumer said earlier this month. "What is your view on Roe vs. Wade? What is your view on gay marriage?"
Other Democrats on the Judiciary Committee agree that all issues, including same-sex marriage, should be put to a nominee for the high court. They include Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Joseph Biden of Delaware.
And, Democrats are not discounting using a filibuster to sink a nominee they think too extreme. Democrats have been bracing for a showdown over the Supreme Court for more than a year.
In May they agreed to allow three Bush judicial nominees to appeals courts to go to a vote in return for Republicans abandoning legislation that would have prevented the use of a filibuster.
The president said he wants the nomination confirmed before the Supreme Court begins its fall session in October.
Among the issues the court will consider when the justices return to work October 3 is a legal challenge to the Solomon Law which allows the government to withhold federal funds from universities that bar military recruiters. Some universities have refused to allow recruiters on campuses because of 'don't ask, don't tell, the military's ban on openly gay people serving in the armed forces.
via 365gay.com
Posted by Bryan Harding
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 at 7:58 AM.
Want to discuss? Leave a comment below.
» Post a Comment