|
|
|
Specter Hints at What Roberts
Can Expect Judiciary Panel Will Probe Nominee's Views on High Court's
'Judicial Activism'.
By Charles Babington
Wednesday, August 24, 2005. The Senate Judiciary Committee chairman
warned Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. yesterday to expect
tough questions about the court's "judicial activism" and lack of
respect for Congress.
The comments mark the second time this month that Sen. Arlen Specter
(R-Pa.) has signaled plans to use Roberts's confirmation hearing as a
forum for sharply criticizing what Specter describes as the high court's
tendency to denigrate Congress's thoroughness and wisdom in passing
various laws. Specter's questions could present Roberts with the
difficult choice of disagreeing with the committee chairman or rebuking
justices he hopes will soon be his colleagues. The committee's hearing
begins Sept. 6.
In a four-page letter to Roberts, Specter criticized portions of Supreme
Court rulings and comments on two cases involving the Americans With
Disabilities Act, which Congress passed in 1990. "I am concerned about
the Supreme Court's judicial activism which has usurped congressional
authority," Specter wrote. Endorsing language from a dissenting opinion
in a 2004 case, Tennessee v. Lane , the senator said the court has "set
itself up as 'taskmaster' to determine whether Congress has done its
'homework,' which demonstrates lack of respect" for the legislative
branch.
Specter particularly criticized Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist's
writings in a 2000 decision, United States v. Morrison , involving the
Violence Against Women Act. He told Roberts he will ask whether he
agrees that Rehnquist's reasoning is an example "of manufactured
rationales used by the Supreme Court to exercise the role of super
legislature." Specter's letter did not address the courts' rulings so
much as justices' comments that he says show a disrespect for Congress
and its diligence in making laws. He praised a dissenting opinion in a
2001 disabilities case that said courts should not "sit as a
superlegislature to judge the wisdom or desirability of legislative
policy determinations."
On Aug. 8 Specter sent Roberts a similar letter regarding Supreme Court
cases that overturned laws dealing with interstate commerce. "Members of
Congress are irate about the Court's denigrating and, really,
disrespectful statements about Congress's competence," Specter wrote
then. He said Roberts will be asked whether there is "any real
justification for the Court's denigrating Congress's 'method of
reasoning' in our constitutional structure of separation of power."
Judiciary Committee member Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) praised both of
Specter's letters yesterday. Specter, he said, "has made it clear that
learning a nominee's judicial philosophy on important cases is essential
in deciding whether or not he should be confirmed to a lifetime
appointment to the Supreme Court."
Source: Washington Post
August 24, 2005
|
|