Roberts Quotations | Page 3

They're probably going to turn back to the Roberts model.

They're all focusing on how John Roberts is going to decide Roe v. Wade. That isn't even the right question. I don't even know of a case in the (court) system that addresses it.

They're all focusing on how John Roberts is going to decide Roe v. Wade . That isn't even the right question. I don't even know of a case in the (court) system that addresses it.

There's every indication that she's very similar to Judge Roberts judicial restraint, limited role of the court, basically a judicial conservative.

Associating Roberts with some kind of extremism would likely backfire because he is unlikely to be seen as extremist.

As we review more and more documents, I think we're finding more evidence that Roberts would vote with the far-right wing of the court and against civil rights protections.

As we approach the hearings, rather than feel confident that we will hear candid answers to critical questions about judicial philosophy, I am concerned that the stage is being set for Judge Roberts to refuse to answer,

A candidate who votes for Roberts, opens themselves up to attack on the grounds that they are not a qualified standard bearer for the party, ... Hillary Clinton or any candidate can't take the Democratic Party for granted. If Roberts hands down some extreme rulings, a vote for Roberts becomes a symbol of the negative consequences of Democratic capitulation.

It will be an extraordinary moment in the first confidential conference when a legendary figure like William Rehnquist is replaced at the head of the table by someone so junior. But John Roberts is one of the few people who would be up to that challenge.

For his entire adult life, John Roberts has been a disciple of and promoted a political and legal ideology that is antithetical to an America that embraces all, including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, ... I have no doubt he's an accomplished lawyer and an affable dinner companion, but that doesn't make him any less a mortal danger to equal rights for gay people, reproductive freedom and affirmative action.

It's too early to tell. Some people believe that Roberts may be similar to Rehnquist in his jurisprudence, although that's not at all clear yet.

It's one more piece of the puzzle as we keep trying to find out who John Roberts is. Where does this fit in on his judicial philosophy and his view of the Constitution?

It's taken 45 years but Johnny Lee Roberts has finally felt comfortable enough to tell the truth of what happened to Kennard. His courage is now causing others to come forward, including prominent whites, to express their long-held misgivings about Kennard's conviction.

It's kind of got everything - good comedy, good drama, good romance - and I can see why Julia Roberts would be attracted to it. Everybody gets to play two parts. You get to play the adult children in Act I and the parents in Act 2 (when the clock is set back 35 years).

It's a pretty pathetic addiction. I'd sit there actually concerned, really hoping that Jorge Sosa got the win or Dave Roberts got a stolen base. No rational person behaves in this manner.

It's a very pointed message in a very public forum to someone about to assume the most important seat on the court, ... Whether he heeds it or not, Roberts can't be indifferent that the Senate is upset about the Supreme Court usurping the functions of Congress, second guessing them, and belittling their reasoning.

It sounds great from an institutional standpoint. Maybe the Court could do a better job of persuasion. But it won't come overnight. If Roberts leads by example and writes clearly and talks to his colleagues, it may happen.

It's pretty clear from the more than 60,000 pages of documents that have been released that John Roberts has a great sense of humor. In this memo, he offers a lawyer joke.

The nomination of John Roberts has evolved considerably since July, when the White House was successful in portraying him as a lawyer above the fray.... Almost daily revelations coming out of the Reagan presidential library show someone at the epicenter of a comprehensive assault on fundamental rights that have been part of the law for decades,

The nomination of john Roberts as chief justice underscores the need for a full examination of his record and past statements,

Each of their surprise disclosures has contained additional reasons for concern about whether Roberts would use his lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court to be an activist for an ideological agenda or an advocate for Americans' personal freedom.

It's hardly surprising that the Alliance for Justice would join PFAW and NARAL in their obligatory opposition to Judge Roberts. Nan Aaron first attacked Judge Roberts a mere 27 minutes after he was nominated and today's Alliance for Justice announcement is the continuation of a false smear campaign borne of a political agenda in lock step with the Michael Moore wing of the Democrat party. As the Senate Judiciary Committee prepares for the confirmation hearings next week, one can only hope that Democrats will choose to approach the hearings in a dignified fashion and reject the over-hyped attacks by the far left.

Nominees must earn their confirmation by providing us with full knowledge of the values and convictions they will bring to decisions that may profoundly affect our progress as a nation. Judge Roberts has not done so. His repeated allegiance to the rule of law reveals little about the values he would bring to the job of chief justice of the United States.

It's yet to be determined how Roberts will deal with important decisions. I don't know his position on issues like stem-cell research, abortion or affirmative action. These are things that someone may attempt to bring to the Supreme Court.

It will be more chaotic than an ordinary term. It adds an extra layer of difficulty for Roberts coming in as the new chief.

They will have no standing to criticize President Bush, John Roberts and the court for taking away fundamental rights that the American people thought was theirs forever.

There was an outhouse. Cliff Roberts built a john, which is still there.

This is a very close question for me. But I must resolve my doubts in favor of the American people whose rights would be in jeopardy if John Roberts turns out to be the wrong person for the job.

I'm inclined to vote for Roberts unless something else comes up. It's a close call.

I'm not being overly critical but it could be smarter for Comcast to focus on the fragmented pieces in the (cable) industry, like Charter Communications, RCN and the smaller mom-and-pop type names, ... It may prove to be too much too soon if Roberts tries to run both cable and media businesses.

I'm expecting Roberts to look a lot like O'Connor, much to the disappointment of some people in the administration.

I keep thinking, 'Hey, that's John Roberts down there, ... But for Josie, it's Dad.

I hope that we'll have somebody who is modest like Judge Roberts says he is, someone who will promote stability so there are no sharp turns.

If Judge Roberts repeatedly resorts to the so-called 'Ginsburg Precedent,' it will sound less like a principled refusal to answer and more like a variation on the Fifth Amendment: 'I refuse to answer that question on the ground that it may incriminate me. Answering may reveal my actual views about constitutional law and cause me to lose votes,'

I must resolve my doubts in favor of the American people whose rights would be in jeopardy if John Roberts turns out to be the wrong person for the job.

I'm not terribly surprised about where we were picked. I think the voting spread shows that most coaches think that it will be a pretty tight race, with several teams having a shot at winning it all. We did get one first-place vote, so apparently one coach out there thinks we're dangerous. Part of the problem with a preseason poll in our conference is that due to the geographical spread of the schools, we don't get to see everyone, such as Oral Roberts or Centenary, prior to the conference season.

If Roberts goes through, it's a big win for McCain.

If you have Julia Roberts in a movie you're never really afraid for her because you know she's not going to die.

If you have a sharp turn in the court you undercut reliance, expectation, and, as Roberts would say, stability,

If you remember, the first day after Bush nominated Roberts as an associate justice, Democrats were basically out there talking tactics/strategy instead of conviction, and essentially saying they couldn't do anything. It was truly pathetic. They created a self-fulfilling prophecy by rolling over and dying. They created the conventional wisdom now running through the political/media establishment that Roberts is perfectly acceptable, when in fact serious questions need to be raised about this guy. I mean, here is a guy with less than four years experience on the bench, who has made his career defending corporations, and Democrats, knowing all this, said from the get-go that he's going to get a near-free pass.

In some ways, Chief Justice Roberts is more open. He has a more welcoming countenance. He's younger. He smiles more.

In our free society, anyone can speak out as they choose on any subject. I am concerned that the Roberts nomination, or others to follow, may provide an occasion for such advertising to get out of hand, ... The NARAL television advertisement is blatantly untrue and unfair. ...

I know Judge Roberts loves the law. I'm not sure he loves the American people.

I have raised a certain cautionary signal, that I believe the next nomination is going to be a great deal more contentious than the Roberts nomination,

I have too many doubts about the direction a Roberts court will take us. Persistent, nagging doubts,

I predict John Roberts will be one of the great chief justices in our nation's history, ... purely political.

I promised John Roberts I would give him a clean slate.

I probably would have voted against Justice Thomas, and, and, and I've been disappointed by what Justice Roberts has done.

In tracking the past seven years, we have not had Julia Roberts in any way, shape or form. She will be highly coveted by designers, highly watched and highly visible.

In fact, his answers combined with his record can only lead us to the conclusion that the confirmation of Judge Roberts will pose a danger ... to women's health and lives.

How did we end the summer ... stuck between a Roberts and a hard place? We've spent months poring over 60,000 pages from the National Archives and reams of personal profiles for clues about how John Roberts would rule on the highest court in land. ... The bottom line is that barring some last minute photo of John Roberts popping out of a cake at a KKK rally smoking crack, he's going to be confirmed. And if he were magically derailed, who would be next? ... John Roberts may turn out to be as far right as People for the American Way says. But he may also be as good as it gets under this administration.

I didn't hear the conversation but Mr. Stephens explained to Mr. Roberts that he had plans for me and I'd be all right.

Chief Justice Roberts has great potential for the future to bring a consensus to the court, to have a better recognition of congressional authority and, as he put it, to understand the Constitution responding to the changes in the ages and responding to societal conditions.

(Chief Justice John) Roberts has set the bar so high because he was so smart and experienced, ... Will you respect the rule of law instead of your personal whims?

By failing to allay the concerns his record raised prior to the hearings, Judge Roberts simply has not met the heavy burden of proving that he warrants a lifetime appointment to the most powerful judgeship in the country.

He's a man who seems to take his legacy seriously, ... The last thing he wants is to be viewed as the man who ran through Roberts on a party vote.

I do, however, recognize that this is a different time, and he has been nominated to play a different kind of role than he played in those early Reagan years. So, frankly, I will be looking for a somewhat different John Roberts than the John Roberts of 1985.

If confirmed to this lifetime job, John Roberts would become the leader of the third branch of the federal government and the most prominent judge in the nation. The Senate must be vigilant in considering this nomination.

You know that scene in 'Runaway Bride' when Julia Roberts puts on the amazing wedding dress and looks at herself in the mirror and goes, 'Swish, swish'? I loved that moment so much when I was a little girl.

The truth is, Judge Roberts is a mainstream nominee, and extremely well-qualified, despite the efforts by some to mischaracterize him,

These hearings are going to be a stark contrast to the Roberts hearings. Can you picture her answering some of the questions that Roberts was asked?

This is a great rivalry, even though we are not in the same league, ... I know that Owen J. Roberts players talk about getting the state championship back.

All evidence indicates that Judge Roberts would use his undeniable impressive legal skills to bring us back to a country that most of us wouldn't recognize, where states' rights trump civil rights, where the federal courts or Congress can see discrimination, but are powerless to remedy it.

(The husband) Stephen Grady was 42-years-old and a finishes manager on the World Trade Centre project in Bahrain. He joined the Murray and Roberts team on this project only four weeks ago.

The groups want certain questions asked of Roberts to lay a predicate for future nominees. Unless there's a revelation we can't fathom, this will be the meat of the hearings.

And in the interests of full disclosure, that NARAL ad did run here on CNN. But since NARAL yanked it, it's not running on this network, obviously, anymore. We are running the Progress for America ad defending John Roberts against such attacks. We should also note that NARAL had told us and other news organizations that its ad was running on Fox News Channel and we reported that, but a Fox spokesman tells us that NARAL never approached Fox to buy any airtime.

All we can do is assume, because when presented with the opportunity to disavow the positions in his memos, Roberts refused,

The echoes of then-Judge Thomas's empty reassurances that he was a mainstream jurist are ringing in the ears of every senator who listened to many nearly identical statements from Judge Roberts last week,

There is clear and convincing evidence that John Roberts is the wrong choice for chief justice, ... I oppose the nomination, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

President Bush should provide the information ... rather than hiding behind a privilege that doesn't exist and encouraging Roberts to not answer questions, ... The American people deserve to know who John Roberts is and where he stands on the vital issues before the country.

I hope I am proven wrong about John Roberts. 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.

I do not believe that John Roberts has met the burden of proof necessary to be confirmed by the Senate as chief justice of the United States, ... Sadly, there is ample evidence that he would turn the clock back on this country's great march of progress toward equal opportunity for all.

The chief justice is the most important judge in the country, with even more responsibility for the protection of the rights and freedoms of all Americans. Thus John Roberts bears a heavier burden when he comes before the Senate.