Hearings on Roberts to begin Sept. 6

By Tom Strode - Aug 15, 2005 - comment

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee will open hearings Sept. 6 on the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court.

Roberts and the 18 members of the panel are scheduled to make opening statements on the first day of the hearings. Senators will begin questioning the nominee Sept. 7.

Abortion-rights and other liberal advocacy organizations are pushing senators to oppose the nominee. Barring any unexpected developments, however, it appears the federal appellate judge has the votes needed for confirmation.

Pro-life, pro-family advocates have given widespread support to Roberts, who has served on the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals since 2003. Most of the information uncovered so far has shown Roberts to hold a conservative viewpoint on hot-button issues.

Though Roberts has not committed himself on the Roe v. Wade opinion legalizing abortion, social conservatives appear content to trust his judicial philosophy, which seems to be based on operating within the constraints of the Constitution. Meanwhile, abortion-rights supporters fear Roberts will vote to overturn the 1973 ruling and have urged his defeat.

Even a report that Roberts provided assistance to advocates for homosexual rights in a 1996 Supreme Court case has failed to peel off most conservative support. At the request of a colleague in his law firm, Roberts donated his expertise to homosexual activists as part of the company’s free legal work. In Romer v. Evans, the Supreme Court voted 6-3 to strike down a Colorado constitutional amendment that barred the state and municipalities from giving civil rights status to homosexuality.

“I understand it was Judge Roberts’ standard practice to provide pro bono assistance when asked by colleagues at the firm in areas of his expertise, which certainly included constitutional law,” said Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission President Richard Land. “It also is my understanding he provided between five and 10 hours of advice and counsel to the firm’s lawyers who were in direct charge of the case. In other words, John Roberts did what lawyers have sworn an oath to do—that is, provide the best legal advice possible to their client, in this case a homosexual rights group that others in the firm had decided to represent.

“Everything in Judge Roberts’ judicial philosophy reveals him to be an original-intent, strict-constructionist judge,” Land said. “It is overwhelmingly probable as a sitting justice he would have voted the same way his mentor, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, did, which was against the majority opinion. . . . We should remember that Judge Roberts did what he had sworn an oath to do—represent his client. And when he is confirmed as a Supreme Court justice, his client will be the Constitution.”

President Bush nominated Roberts, 50, to replace Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who retired July 1 after 24 years of service.

Further Learning

Learn more about: Family, Sexual Purity, Homosexuality, Life, Abortion, Citizenship, National, Social Issues

Post a Comment




Notify me of follow-up comments?

Before You Submit Your Comment (below), Read This:

Thank you for your interest in the ministry of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (SBC).

Comments are moderated to preserve the family-oriented nature of this website and in an attempt to avoid comment spam. We welcome opposing viewpoints, and we will not turn comments away as long as your views are presented with respect to everyone.

Your comments will not appear immediately and are subject to editing or deletion. We will make every attempt to check new comments in a timely manner, though there will likely be delays on the weekends and around holidays.

Please follow the these guidelines to insure your comments will be posted:

  1. Use a real name, at least a real first name. We find folks are less-rude online when not hiding behind a screen-name.
  2. Name-calling and vulgar-language will not be tolerated. Zero-tolerance is our policy. We will not spend time editing profanity. If it contains foul language, your post will be deleted. Oh, and we decide what is and what is not vulgar.
  3. Comments must be on topic. General comments (compliments, complaints, and otherwise) are best delivered here or expressed on your own personal Web site.
  4. And please, do not type in ALL CAPS. It looks like you're screaming at people.

Additionally, within Baptist polity, please recognize that many issues and decisions are addressed at a local church level. SBC denominational (national) offices have no control and desire no control over the activities of a local church. This entity is not responsible for overseeing and insuring the ethical behavior of Southern Baptist pastors or church members. If your concern involves a legal civil or criminal matter, we suggest you contact the proper local officials.

Issues involving pastoral staff or other church members, local Baptist associations or state Baptist conventions are local issues. Therefore the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission cannot and should not address such issues. While we regret we are unable to assist you, we encourage you to seek a biblical resolution of the issue at the local church level. If your question or submission pertains to a matter covered in this text, it is likely we will not acknowledge your submission.

Other than that, we welcome you and hope to see thoughtful discussions at ERLC.com