Political Crossfire Forums

[endersshadow]

Roberts Confirmed as Chief Justice



Bush poised to name O'Connor replacement

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Judge John Roberts was easily confirmed Thursday to be the 17th chief justice of the United States, winning Senate approval with a solid majority.

He is expected to be sworn in to the post later in the day.

The 78-22 vote ended a nearly three-month roller coaster ride for the 50-year-old federal appeals judge.

He was originally nominated to fill the vacancy created by the pending retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. But following the death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist September 3, Roberts was quickly named by President Bush to take over the court's top spot.

All 55 Republicans were united in their support. They were joined by 22 Democrats and one independent senator. Twenty-two Democrats voted no.

In an unusual break from tradition, senators voted from their seats as their names were called. Lawmakers usually are free to mill about the floor or leave the chamber.

The vote was never in doubt, despite misgivings from some Democrats that Roberts would be too conservative.

"I hope I am proven wrong about John Roberts," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, in a floor speech before the vote. "I have been proven wrong before on my confirmation votes. I regret my vote to confirm Justice Scalia, even though he too, like Judge Roberts was a nice person and a very smart Harvard lawyer."

Kennedy was also among five Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee to vote against Roberts. Others voting in opposition included Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Dianne Feinstein of California and Evan Bayh from Roberts' home state of Indiana.

Democrats voting yes included Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Ron Wyden of Oregon and Max Baucus of Montana.

"I do not know, none of us do, the mark that Chief Justice Roberts will leave on the court," said Sen. Mitch McConnell R-Kentucky. "With his many fine qualities he may be a great administrator, he may leave some great reform of our court system, he may revolutionize some area of law -- but he will be a successful leader."
Next nominee

With Roberts widely expected confirmation, attention on Capitol Hill shifts to the president's choice to replace retiring O'Connor. (View a gallery of possible Supreme Court nominees)

At the White House, spokesman Scott McClellan called on the Senate to treat Bush's next nominee in the same "civil and dignified way" Roberts was treated.

"The president will nominate someone that all Americans can be proud of, someone who is highly qualified to serve on the highest court in our land," McClellan said.

"While this nomination did not warrant an attempt to block this nominee on the floor of the Senate, the next one might," warned Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, in a speech Wednesday. "I hope and pray the president chooses to unite, rather than divide -- that he chooses consensus over confrontation."

Democrats express concern

Some Democrats complained that Roberts did not adequately answer their questions, after Roberts repeatedly deflected inquiries by insisting he could not comment on issues that might come before the high court.

Because O'Connor has been a moderate swing vote on the closely divided court, the battle over her replacement could prove more contentious than the comparatively mild tussle over Roberts' confirmation.

Bush administration officials close to the selection process have told CNN that Bush will announce his nominee to replace O'Connor as soon as Friday.

The focus of the search process has been on women and minority candidates, Bush sources confirm, although White House advisers are holding their cards close to the vest.

Roberts, a native of Buffalo, New York, grew up in Indiana before going east to Harvard for undergraduate studies and law school. A Roman Catholic, he is married with two small children.

Bill Mears of CNN's Washington Bureau contributed to this report.

[Protostar]

This does not suprise me. Was there ever any doubt? No, even if all the Democrats didn't vote he still would have been confirmed.

[Classically Liberal]

Good, I think he will be solid.

[W.C. Emerson]

yeah- definetly not surprised about this one. The question is, who will replace O'Connor?

[Nathyn]

W.C. Emerson wrote: yeah- definetly not surprised about this one. The question is, who will replace O'Connor?
I could be wrong, but... I THINK SHE HAS TO DIE FIRST.

Why are you thinking so far ahead?

"Please, oh, Lord. Striketh dead thy Liberal Justices."

[Lord Hargreaves]

Nathyn wrote: W.C. Emerson wrote: yeah- definetly not surprised about this one. The question is, who will replace O'Connor?
I could be wrong, but... I THINK SHE HAS TO DIE FIRST.

Why are you thinking so far ahead?

"Please, oh, Lord. Striketh dead thy Liberal Justices."

................................................................................................... :!?:

She said she'd resign when a replacement is found, remember? Thats what started this all off.

[superskippy]

I could be wrong, but... I THINK SHE HAS TO DIE FIRST.

Why are you thinking so far ahead?

"Please, oh, Lord. Striketh dead thy Liberal Justices."

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: We need to start a stupid post of the week thing lol. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Just read up on the News a bit more, just a little mistake is all.

[Lymetime]

Personally I have no problem with this nomination, but man oh man, I would be pissed if I was one of the other Supreme Court Justices with aspirations and some young punk had leap-frogged me into the Chief Justice position. Guaranteed resentment and bitterness...or maybe not, that's just me. One thing is for sure, the Republican hold on the Court is solidified once again for another 20-30 years with this taking place. They sure know how to play to the game.

[SCC]

Nathyn wrote: W.C. Emerson wrote: yeah- definetly not surprised about this one. The question is, who will replace O'Connor?
I could be wrong, but... I THINK SHE HAS TO DIE FIRST.

Why are you thinking so far ahead?

"Please, oh, Lord. Striketh dead thy Liberal Justices."

too funny. You really are stuck in the Elizabethan ages aren't you? Thou art not learned.

[Alula]

:shock: national debt? Do you know who owns our national debt. It was something like 222 million dollars a year in interest payed to that owner.
:!oops: I don't want to say too much because yes I believe that I should as an american citicen sorta keep my mouth shut :roll: Butt ( that was a big butt) I love this country and so did my Grandpa when he fought the battle of the bulge. I know that ppl in that country especially women are treated like as I should put it in a nice way :x I believe that the president made his desicion it was a hard one at that but here's another big but how do you get congress to agree? how does it work for him? I'm not him. Nor would I run for the presidency frankly I can't spell well enough. I probably wouldn't spell tomato correctly either for everybody just to make them happy. grandpa fought in the four hundred and ninth I saw his book 253 men died in his platoon. Did they die in vien?
:(

[Alula]

:lol: you guys are wild. I can't believe what nathyn said. dude. Get a Grip.
I don't know as much as you don't know okay. :? man when you guys start talkin about knockin ppl off its like when does reality step in. :!?:
I need to know that those like Rodney King and Reginal Denny's aren't going to be your focus. Frankly if they come get us they come get us I will never ever threaten a Judiciary I can't believe that you would. THe judicial system is integral to the society in wich we have in place. If you don't like America than don't let the door hit ya on the way out. :-o