Topic: What Questions Would You Ask Yourself?
Senator: Schumer
Date: SEPTEMBER 15, 2005
Contents
SCHUMER: Now, yesterday, as I told you, I was, sort of, confounded by the refusal to answer certain questions.
I don't think any of us expected you to answer every question or give us the answer the way we wanted. But we did hope that you would answer enough questions with enough specificity so that we and the American people would get a clear picture of the kind of chief justice you will be, not just rely on your assurances.
So I want to try this another way because I really want to find out.
You're one of the best litigators in America. You know how to convince people. That's what you've been paid to do for a long time.
So let me ask you, if you were sitting here, what question would you ask John Roberts so that you or us could be sure that we weren't nominating what I call an ideologue, someone who you might define as somebody who wants to make law not interpret law?
And then how would you answer the question you asked yourself?
(LAUGHTER)
ROBERTS: I'd begin by saying, "That's a good question, sir."
(LAUGHTER)
I think, with respect, I would ask a lot of the questions that have been asked, a lot of the questions that were asked in the questionnaire that I completed earlier.
And it begins with the most important question: What is your view of the proper role of the judge in our system? And people have different answers to that question. I've given an answer to that question.
How do you approach particular cases in areas of particular interest? And I've been asked that question and I've given an answer. I've explained, for example, in the area of executive power, as issues arise, what would the framework that I would use be.
And I've talked about the Youngstown opinion and Justice Jackson's framework there.
I've talked about how I would approach cases involving the right to privacy under the liberty clause.
I've talked about how I would approach cases involving government enforcement in the...
SCHUMER: How about something that you haven't talked -- a question that hasn't been asked, since some of us are still unsure?
ROBERTS: But in other areas people talk about personal views on issues. And there, again, I think it's important. There may be some nominees who want to share personal views on issues.
My reaction has been to emphasize -- and I think this tells you about what kind of a judge I hope I am on the Court of Appeals and what kind of a justice I would be if confirmed -- and my reaction has been that I set those personal views aside, and so don't consider them pertinent.
Other nominees might take a different approach in response to those types of questions.
People have asked about particular decisions, and I've talked about decisions in which I've been involved. We've talked, with Senator Grassley, about the Totten case, in which I was involved; others about the Barbour case, involving Congress' power under the spending clause.
People have asked very probing questions about my legal positions: "What was the position you were advocating in this case? And why?"
I think it's fair to talk about the record...
SCHUMER: Any question that you would ask that's been left out?
ROBERTS: There have been a lot of questions asked and a lot answered. I can't think of any that, you know, I expected people to ask me about this and it hasn't been asked.
SCHUMER: So I guess we did a better job than we think we did, right?
ROBERTS: I think the committee has been very effective over the last several days in learning a lot about me. I think in the process of meeting with the senators before -- and I was quite serious when I said I appreciated how accommodating everyone had been in sitting down with me -- I think people learned a lot about me.
I think you can learn a lot about me from looking at the 50 opinions I've written.
ROBERTS: You can learn about...
Contents
Prev
Next
Last
