|
|
ADF Used to Play Pivotal Role in Protecting Missouri Citizens from Hardcore Pornography…
As many of you know, I was Executive Director of the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography during President Reagan’s Administration, and ADF co-founder Dr. James Dobson was a key member of the Commission.
From that work, and my involvement with hundreds of tragic investigations and cases, I am sadly all too aware of the toll hardcore pornography and its distribution and consumption take on children, families, and communities. I also know fighting it is a winnable war.
(To read the Zenit News Service interview I gave on this subject, visit www.zenit.org/english/visualizza.phtml?sid=57511)
Because of my years in that arena I am so thankful for the pivotal role that ADF through the efforts of our Community Defense Counsel, recently played in the implementation of a new law in Missouri that places reasonable restrictions on how sexually oriented businesses (SOBs) in the state operate.
This law will help protect countless children, families, and communities from the very harmful impact of SOBs.
The bill, HR972, signed into law by Missouri Governor Matt Blunt in mid-July, allows county and state officials to close an SOB as a public nuisance if the owner of the business allows criminal activity to occur on the premises.
Todd Scott, the legal counsel for State Senator Matt Bartle, the sponsor of the legislation said: “Many thanks to ADF attorneys in Kansas City and for the guidance of the Community Defense Counsel publication.”
ADF senior counsel Mike Johnson added: “This bill is a valuable part of the ongoing effort to reduce the negative secondary effects of SOBs on Missourians.
ADF applauds the signing of this bill and is glad to have been part of the process in making it a reality.”
For more information on how you can help effectively battle SOBs and hardcore pornography in your community, go to www.communitydefense.org.
And, once again, thank you for making this victory, with God’s grace, for Missouri families and communities possible through your prayers and support.
Thank you for allowing ADF to grow in impact and diversity of our service to the Body of Christ and our nation.
Read the ADF press release...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prayer Requests
"Without Christ, we can do nothing." - John 15:5
Please pray for the Blackstone Legal Fellowship interns as they return to their respective campuses.
Please pray for wisdom in the many legal battles ahead.
Alliance Defense Fund
15333 N. Pima Road Suite 165
Scottsdale, AZ 85260 (480)444-0020
info@alliancedefensefund.org
President Bush has chosen federal appeals court judge John G. Roberts Jr. as his first nominee for the Supreme Court, selecting a rock solid conservative whose nomination could trigger a tumultuous battle over the direction of the nation's highest court.
Read the full details, the latest commentary and Roberts' strong criticism of Roe v. Wade -- Go to NewsMax.com for more information.
|
Bush Nominates Judge John G. Roberts: 'He has a good
heart'
By Pete Winn, associate editor
SUMMARY: Roberts is praised by conservatives; liberal
groups immediately begin the attack.
President Bush this evening unveiled his nominee to
replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the U.S. Supreme
Court: Federal Appeals Court Judge John Roberts.
Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, called
Roberts an "exceptionally well-qualified and impartial
nominee."
He said, "Judge Roberts is widely respected for his fair
judgments, intellect and integrity, all things qualifying
him to serve as the next Supreme Court Justice."
Pro-family legal experts who know Roberts best, say they
are extremely pleased with the pick.
Sean Rushton, executive director of the Committee for
Justice, had high praise.
"I think it's a big victory for anybody who thinks that
the Supreme Court has badly overstepped its legitimate
authority over the past decades," Rushton said. "John
Roberts is one of the truly great legal minds of his
generation. He is a principled constitutionalist. He's
held those views for a long time.
"He represents a very calm and very erudite perspective,
but also one that has a core of judicial restraint behind
it."
Northwestern University Law Professor Stephen Calabresi
said Roberts is a top-drawer candidate.
"I think the president did something very bold here,"
Calabresi said. "Everyone really expected him to nominate
a woman or a minority to succeed Justice O'Connor, and I
think he did something bold and went with a person whom he
thought was the very best and most qualified."
Roberts, a former clerk for Justice William Rehnquist,
argued 39 cases before the Supreme Court as deputy
solicitor general, before he was named in 2003 to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He
was confirmed to that post by the Senate on 99-0 vote --
after being stalled for more than two years by Democrats.
"He's a brilliant legal mind, and his qualifications are
impeccable," Calabresi said. "I would say that Roberts is
every bit as good as (Justice Antonin) Scalia or
Rehnquist, for whom he clerked."
Indeed, "brilliant" seems to be the word most often
applied to Roberts.
The Buffalo, N.Y., native took only three years to
graduate from Harvard College in 1976 summa cum laude, and
was at the top of his class at Harvard Law School -- from
which he graduated in 1979.
"He's really a legal superstar," Rushton said. "The
president has really hit a home run by picking him."
In his comments, Bush said Roberts had earned the respect
of people from both political parties.
"After he was nominated for the Court of Appeals in 2001,"
he said, "a bipartisan group of more than 150 lawyers sent
a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee. They wrote,
'Although as individuals we reflect a wide spectrum of
political party affiliation and ideology, we are united in
our belief that John Roberts will be an outstanding
federal court appeals judge and should be confirmed by the
United States Senate.' "
Douglas Kmiec, a law professor at Pepperdine University,
and a distinguished conservative legal expert, said he was
"surprised and very pleased" the president had nominated
"someone who won't be imposing his ideas from the bench."
Kmiec said Roberts is "extremely effective," and said he
had been described as "the smartest lawyer in America."
"But he is also an extremely likeable man," Kmiec said.
"He's a person whose life is organized around his family,
who takes a great interest in his neighbors, and . . .
reflects all of those great Midwestern values of caring
about your neighbor."
Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a pro-family member of the
Senate Judiciary Committee, praised the nomination.
"It is imperative that the next Supreme Court justice help
restore the Constitutional balance of power between the
branches of government and leave legislating to Congress
and the states," said Coburn.
< Filibuster or No Filibuster? >
The big question is: Will Democrats in the Senate
filibuster the nomination?
In a news release, the liberal activist group People for
the American Way immediately went on the attack,
characterizing Robert's record as "troubling" -- and
urging Americans to "wait until all the facts are in."
In comments after the announcement, Sen. Patrick Leahy,
D-Vt., the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary
Committee, gave indications that he and his fellow
Democrats in the Senate don't think highly of the
candidate. He said Roberts was not what they considered a
"consensus candidate" and virtually promised that Roberts
would not have an easy time as a nominee.
"We need to ensure that the Supreme Court remains a
protector of all Americans' rights and liberties from
government intrusion," Leahy said, "and that the Supreme
Court understands the role of Congress in passing
legislation to protect ordinary Americans from abuse by
powerful special interests. No one is entitled to a free
pass to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court."
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., another member of the powerful
Senate Judiciary Committee unintentionally exposed the
ultra-liberal view of the Supreme Court as a place where
activist judges can best legislate from the bench, when he
said, "Now that he is nominated for a position where he
can overturn precedent and make law, it is even more
important that he fully answers a very broad range of
questions."
Concerning the Senate confirmation process, Coburn said,
"I look forward to the opportunity to interview Judge
Roberts and I support the right of senators to ask any
appropriate question. The only litmus test the Senate
should consider is Judge Robert's loyalty to the
Constitution and its strict construction."
Calabresi said the comments by Leahy and Schumer show "how
incredibly political the senators who have been opposing
the president's judicial nominees are."
He added: "What they really want are judges who will
pledge to decide certain cases in a certain way, which
would compromise judicial independence.
Rushton said a filibuster by Senate Democrats -- though
expected -- may not be a foregone conclusion.
"Joseph Lieberman, a fairly moderate Democrat from
Connecticut, said on the record last week, that he told
the White House that he would not consider Roberts as
worthy of filibuster," he said.
Rushton said if Democrats attempt to filibuster Roberts
over judicial ideology, Republican members of the
so-called "Gang of 14" that struck the compromise deal
have indicated they are willing to support the
"constitutional option" to end the use of filibusters
against judicial nominees.
"Either way," Rushton said, "even if they attempt to
filibuster, I'm not sure they can get moderate Democrats
to join. We might be able to beat it straight up. If we
can't, then we will have the constitutional option."
"I think there will be a fight," Calabresi said, "but I do
believe he'll be confirmed, and he ought to be confirmed.
I think he certainly deserves an up-or-down vote."
------------------------------------------------------
-- Curriculum Vitae --
John G. Roberts, Jr.
< Born >
Jan. 27, 1955 in Buffalo, N.Y. He grew up in Indiana.
< Family >
Roberts lives in Bethesda, Md., with his wife Jane
Sullivan Roberts and their two children, Jack and Josie.
< Religion >
Catholic
< Federal Judicial Service >
2003-Now -- U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit
Nominated by President Bush on Jan. 7, 2001, confirmed by
the Senate on May 8, 2003, and commissioned on June 2,
2003.
Note: Roberts was first nominated to the D.C. Circuit in
1992 by President George H.W. Bush, but was opposed by
Democrats and never received a Senate vote.
< Education >
Harvard, A.B., 1976 -- summa cum laude
Harvard Law School, J.D., 1979 -- magna cum laude
< Professional Career >
1979-1980 -- Law clerk, Hon. Henry Friendly, 2nd U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals
1980-1981 -- Law clerk to then-Associate Justice William
Rehnquist, Supreme Court of the United States
1981-1982 -- Special assistant to Attorney General William
French Smith, U.S. Department of Justice under President
Reagan
1982-1986 -- Associate counsel to President Reagan, White
House Counsel's Office
1986-1989, 1993-2003 -- Private practice, Hogan & Hartson,
Washington, D.C.
1989-1993 -- Principal deputy solicitor general, U.S.
Department of Justice, where he argued 39 cases before the
Supreme Court.
< Memberships >
Roberts is a member of the American Law Institute and the
American Academy of Appellate Lawyers.
CE05GCZL
Copyright (c) 2005, Focus on the Family. All rights reserved. International copyright secured. This article appeared in CitizenLink Daily Update published (date), a policy and culture information service of Focus on the Family. For more information, see http://www.citizenlink.org."
|
Man in the News | John Glover Roberts
An Ultimate Capital Insider
By NEIL A. LEWIS
Published: July 20, 2005
WASHINGTON, July 19 - In nominating Judge John G. Roberts for the Supreme Court, President Bush, who likes to portray himself as an outsider to Washington and its culture, chose an ultimate insider in the capital.
Judge John G. Roberts reacting last night as President Bush nominated him to the Supreme Court.
RELATED DOCUMENTS
• Profile: John G. Roberts (findlaw.com)
• District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions (cadc.uscourts.gov)
• Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Roberts
Forum: Issues Before the Supreme Court
Mr. Bush considered candidates from around the country, his aides had said. But his choice, Judge Roberts, 50, owns the kind of résumé and experience that is prized in Washington; a driven student, he graduated from Harvard College in only three years and went on to Harvard Law School. That was followed by a clerkship on the Supreme Court with William H. Rehnquist when he was an associate justice.
Mr. Bush's father wanted to put Judge Roberts on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, regarded as second in importance only to the Supreme Court, when he was 36. When the Democrats who controlled the Senate at the time balked, he went out and developed a lucrative private practice at Hogan & Hartson, a top-tier Washington firm, attracting a flock of corporate clients.
Judge Roberts, widely described as cordial and wry, has been comfortable in the Washington world in which top lawyers, journalists and others mix easily.
"John is one of those guys who is almost always the smartest one in the room, but you'd never know it," said J. Warren Gorrell Jr., chairman of Hogan & Hartson. "He doesn't take himself too seriously and is always careful to acknowledge the accomplishments of other people. He has a great legal mind."
Mr. Gorrell and others who know Mr. Roberts, who grew up in Indiana, describe him as unasssuming and modest.
"It sounds a little awkward to say that a person who was just nominated to the Supreme Court of the United States is a regular guy, but he is," Mr. Gorrell said.
Patricia A. Brannan, a partner at Hogan & Hartson who attended Harvard Law School with Mr. Roberts, said her former colleague possessed what she called a "Midwest calm."
"He would wear very well" in the cloistered world of the Supreme Court, Ms. Brannan added.
Judge Roberts and his wife, Jane Marie Sullivan, also a lawyer, live in Chevy Chase, Md., and have two children, Jack, 4, and Josephine, 5. Friends described the couple as devout Catholics.
If he is confirmed to the Supreme Court, he will find himself on familiar ground. He has stood in the well of the court 39 times arguing cases before the justices he may soon join on the other side of the bench.
The number of cases, some on behalf of the government when he was a deputy solicitor general, the rest representing private clients, puts him in an elite company of lawyers who regularly appear before the court.
In winning 25 of those cases, he has gained a reputation as one of the handful of lawyers in the nation who are at the top of their game when the game is making a clear-headed argument and remaining cool when nine justices can fire questions at you.
Even though Judge Roberts has practiced law in the headiest of environments, he has generally avoided revealing much about his personal views on issues or some of the hot-button cases that are often at the center of confirmation battles.
Even in the last two years as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit he has not produced any especially provocative writings.
The one arguable exception in his career is that as deputy solicitor general in 1991, he signed a legal brief to the Supreme Court arguing on behalf of the first President George Bush: "We continue to believe that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and should be overruled," a reference to the 1973 opinion that first found a Constitutional right to abortion.
That brief is sure to become a topic of debate in his confirmation hearings as abortion rights advocates have already suggested it will be their prime exhibit in opposing his nomination. His supporters will almost certainly respond by raising the issue as to whether it is fair to attribute to a lawyer the views of his client, in that case the president.
In his first year on the appeals court he seemed to throw in his lot in one case with advocates of the new federalism, that is, judges and scholars who believe Congress is limited in the laws it may enact, leaving some issues to states.
|
Liberal Groups Go On the Offensive
by Aaron Atwood, assistant editor
SUMMARY: Conservatives respond to liberal messages on
Roberts nomination.
Left-leaning organizations across the nation have
responded to President Bush's nomination of John Roberts
with vitriol. They say they are concerned about his record
and his ideology, as well as his lack of a record and lack
of ideology.
Trent England, legal-policy analyst for the Heritage
Foundation's Center for Legal and Judicial Studies,
observed that Democrats have a three-pronged approach.
"Part one is to complain about the pre-nomination
consultation, part two they'll complain that whoever is
nominated, regardless, is ideologically 'extreme' and part
three that the Senate hasn't been given enough
information."
The most common springboard is a brief Roberts filed for
the first Bush administration. At the time Roberts was
U.S. Deputy Solicitor General and filed a brief in which
he argued, among other things, that Roe v. Wade should be
overturned. Carrie Gordon Earll, senior manager of special
legislative projects for Focus on the Family Action said
Roberts' views, though unclear, give an indication of his
judicial philosophy.
"This brief was written for his employer, the Solicitor
General," Earll said. "He was advocating for the positions
of his employer and no one knows if that is a personal
view.
"The bottom line here is that by all indications we have a
jurist who is an originalist -- who believes that the
Constitution is a literal document with fixed meaning. If
that is indeed true, it will be communicated during his
confirmation process. If so, we may not like all of his
rulings but we can trust that the application of the law
will be strict."
True to form, the usual liberal groups have attacked
Roberts' record with an ominous tone.
"Roberts' record is a disturbing one," Ralph Neas,
executive director of People for the American Way, said.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced "the
stakes could not be higher" and "expressed deep concern
about some of the civil liberties positions advocated by
Judge John Roberts."
These so-called concerns are unfounded said Gary Marx,
executive director of the Judicial Confirmation Network.
"I feel very good about his judicial philosophy and the
way he approaches the law," Marx said. "Very clearly, he
has worked with the best legal minds in the business and
has quickly become one of the best. He has
private-practice experience, judicial experience,
experience in the Reagan White House and experience as
Chief Justice William Rehnquist's clerk."
Moveon.org predictably called Roberts "out of step with
the rest of the country."
Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean took
the opportunity to say that Roberts' nomination would
divide the country rather than unite it.
"It is disappointing that when President Bush had the
chance to bring the country together, he instead turned to
a nominee who may have impressive legal credentials, but
also has sharp partisan credentials that cannot be
ignored," Dean said.
Dean ignores the fact that Roberts has occasionally
represented prominent Democrats.
The actual division this nomination causes is among
Democrats. In his confirmation to the D.C. Circuit Court
of Appeals, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 14-3 in
favor of Roberts. The Senate confirmed him through a voice
vote -- avoiding a roll-call in order to downplay the
party schism.
England expects this confirmation to delve into tricky
territory.
"The Left is laying the ground work for a confirmation
hearing that will look like an inquisition," he said.
"They have conveniently forgotten precedent set by the
Ruth Bader Ginsberg hearing where she was able to sidestep
any hot-button question she wanted. They will be asking
him questions he cannot answer (because) if answered in
full, they will violate the code of judicial conduct. When
he doesn't answer they will claim he's holding something
back."
Indeed, the stage seems set for a deep investigation into
Roberts' background.
"A lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court requires a
confirmation process that is thoughtful, intelligent and
fully deliberated -- the Senate owes the American public
nothing less," said Karen Pearl, interim president of the
Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
"The Left will be pushing for delay and for every single
piece of paper Roberts has ever written a grocery list
on," Marx said.
He pointed out that even one of the most liberal members
of the Supreme Court got an up-or-down vote.
"Ginsburg was an ACLU lawyer, well-qualified, but given a
vote," he said. "If we disagree with that process we have
a disagreement with the Founders."
---------------------------------------------
Quote Unquote; Both Sides React Strongly to Roberts
The airwaves and presses have been flooded with opinions
and comments regarding Supreme Court nominee Judge John G.
Roberts.
Here's a sampling of quotes -- some in favor, some in
opposition.
------------------------------
"I believe that Judge Roberts is exactly the kind of
justice America expects on the Supreme Court.
He is a mainstream conservative -- someone who understands
that the role of a judge is to interpret the law and the
Constitution and not legislate from the bench.
He is someone who will be fair, open-minded and impartial
-- not someone who will pre-judge cases, pre-determine
outcomes or advance a personal political agenda."
-- U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
------------------------------
"John Roberts' record raises serious concerns as well as
questions about where he stands on crucial legal and
constitutional issues. Replacing O'Connor with someone who
is not committed to upholding Americans' rights and legal
protections would create far-reaching and long-lasting
harm to Americans' lives and liberties."
-- Liberal pressure group People for the American Way
------------------------------
"(Roberts), over the last two decades, has become probably
the premier Supreme Court litigator of our generation --
he's the very best of the best. He is an extraordinary
intellect."
-- Dean Colson, former Rehnquist clerk, lawyer and friend
of John Roberts
------------------------------
"At this time, Alliance for Justice cannot support Judge
Roberts' elevation to the Supreme Court. While we will be
conducting a complete analysis of his record on and off
the bench, an initial review has led to serious concerns
about whether he will be fair, independent and will
protect the rights and freedoms of all Americans."
-- The left-leaning Alliance for Justice
------------------------------
"He was an extraordinary lawyer, and I am persuaded he
will be an exceptional justice. President Bush, in my
opinion, has kept his promise to nominate an individual
who will interpret, not rewrite the Constitution."
-- Brian Fahling, senior trial attorney for the American
Family Association Center for Law & Policy
------------------------------
"(We) call upon the Senate to stand up to President Bush's
attempt to destroy the fragile balance on the Supreme
Court."
--The National Abortion Federation
------------------------------
"President Bush has chosen an exceptionally well-qualified
and impartial nominee for the Supreme Court. Judge Roberts
is widely respected for his fair judgment, intellect and
integrity, all things qualifying him to serve as the next
Supreme Court Justice. I believe that Judge Roberts will
strictly interpret the Constitution and not legislate from
the bench."
-- Tony Perkins, Family Research Council
------------------------------
"President Bush has consciously chosen the path of
confrontation, and he should know that we . . . are ready
for the battle ahead."
-- NARAL Pro-Choice America
------------------------------
"Judge Roberts is an experienced jurist with impeccable
credentials who the president nominated to faithfully
apply the Constitution. Judges are not legislators. We
all should appreciate the president's determination to
nominate someone he is confident will interpret the law
rather than make it."
-- Clarke D. Forsythe, Esq., Americans United for Life
------------------------------
"We refuse to allow Roberts, who is such a stealth
opponent of women's rights, to pass the Senate
confirmation process. George W. Bush just guaranteed the
fight of his political career with this nomination."
-- Kim Gandy, president of National Organization for Women
------------------------------
"Judge Roberts is widely respected for his appellate
advocacy, having argued some 39 cases before the Supreme
Court. He knows how to think on his feet, his warm
engaging personality will serve him well at his hearing
and be a big plus for him with the American people."
-- Jan LaRue, chief counsel with Concerned Women for
America
------------------------------
"The president has chosen someone with suitable legal
credentials, but that is not the end of our inquiry. The
Senate must review Judge Roberts' record to determine if
he has a demonstrated commitment to the core American
values of freedom, equality and fairness."
-- Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
------------------------------
"This is a very, very activist court. I want to know
whether he's going to be like that -- somebody who would
eagerly and willingly overturn settled law."
-- Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
------------------------------
"The president had an opportunity to unite the country
with his Supreme Court nomination, to nominate an
individual in the image of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Instead, by putting forward John Roberts' name, President
Bush has chosen a more controversial nominee and
guaranteed a more controversial confirmation process."
-- Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
------------------------------
"The president has done his duty with great care and
promptness. Now, it's the Senate's turn. The American
people will rightly demand that senators conduct
themselves expeditiously and with civility as they carry
out their constitutional 'advice and consent'
responsibilities."
-- The Heritage Foundation
------------------------------
"I will keep my powder dry until the due diligence is
completed."
-- Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
------------------------------
"Judge Roberts is an exceptional choice who will bring
sound legal reasoning to the Supreme Court of the United
States. We call on the Senate to begin the confirmation
process and move swiftly to conduct fair hearings and to
confirm this exceptional nominee."
--Jay Sekulow, chief counsel, American Center for Law and
Justice
|
John Roberts
Published: July 20, 2005
(Page 2 of 2)
In the case in which a California resort sued the Interior Department over a regulation governing arroyo toads, he wrote that the full court should reconsider the resort's claim because the toads had no effect on interstate commerce, the rationale for federal intervention. The toad, he wrote, "for reasons of its own, lives its entire life in California."
RELATED DOCUMENTS
• Profile: John G. Roberts (findlaw.com)
• District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals Opinions (cadc.uscourts.gov)
• Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Roberts
Forum: Issues Before the Supreme Court
Judge Roberts also upheld the arrest of a 12-year-old girl who was handcuffed by transit police on the Washington area subway system for eating a single French fry. "No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation," he wrote, but that the police did not violate the girl's rights under the constitution's Fourth Amendment guarantee against unreasonable searches.
Last week, Judge Roberts was one of three judges who ruled unanimously that the Bush administration and the White House could conduct war crimes trials against suspected terrorists detained at the naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. The opinion reversed a ruling from a lower court judge that the military commissions used to try detainees on war crimes violated the Constitution and international law.
Because he has such a scant record on many of the social issues that come before the courts, some conservatives have suggested that his political profile is similar to that of Justice David H. Souter. When Justice Souter was nominated by President Bush's father in 1990, the White House and others said he would prove a reliable conservative; instead, he proved a profound disappointment.But unlike Justice Souter, who hailed from New Hampshire, Judge Roberts is well known in Washington legal circles; has been active in the Federalist Society, the conservative lawyers group; and has many people to vouch for his conservative instincts.
On the other side of the political equation, he is likely to be confirmed, at least with far less trouble than many of the other candidates who had been listed as possible Bush choices. Even as Democrats were resisting many of Mr. Bush's other appeals court candidates with filibusters, Mr. Roberts was approved by a vote of 16 to 3 in the Judiciary Committee and confirmed unanimously by voice vote on May 9, 2003. As befits a Washington player, he brought endorsements from many Democrats, including Seth P. Waxman, President Bill Clinton's former solicitor general, who described the nominee as "an exceptionally well-qualified appellate advocate."
Since he served inside the Reagan White House, where he helped choose judges, Mr. Roberts has helped strengthen the conservative hold on the federal judiciary. But as an established member of the Washington legal scene, Mr. Roberts also learned how to navigate a bipartisan capital, working alongside many Democrats at Hogan & Hartson.
John Glover Roberts was born in Buffalo and grew up in Indiana, the son of an executive for the Bethlehem Steel Company and a homemaker. When Mr. Bush presented Judge Roberts in the Cross Hall on Tuesday night, he made special mention of the judge's having worked summers in steel mills, an apparent effort to give him some working-class cachet.
When Justice Stephen G. Breyer was nominated to the court by Mr. Clinton, he stressed that he once dug ditches for a summer.
Judge Roberts attended the La Lumiere School, a small, nominally Catholic boys' boarding school in La Porte, Ind., where he quickly outpaced his classmates and was given a special curriculum.
Rob MacLaverty, a Chicago businessman who went to the school with Judge Roberts, recalled that he was admired by the faculty as well as his fellow students.
"They figured out pretty quickly that he was ahead of the rest of us," Mr. MacLaverty said. "He pretty much finished high school by his junior year and they put together some individual tutorials to keep him occupied."
Mr. MacLaverty said that Judge Roberts, who was captain of the football team, was remarkable in that while he was clearly special he never behaved as he was.
"He had a nice, friendly demeanor then," he said. "Just as he has now."
Although it was a boarding school, Judge Roberts' family lived nearby in Long Beach, a quiet lakeside town.
Richard Lazarus, a law professor at Georgetown University, described himself as a liberal but said that was no impediment to being a good friend to Judge Roberts. Judge Roberts's mode and mentor, he said, was not Chief Justice Rehnquist, but rather the appeals court judge for whom he clerked, Henry J. Friendly, who served on the appeals court based in New York until his death in 1986.
"They were very much alike," Professor Lazarus said. "He was hired by Judge Friendly without an interview because John's credentials were like his. They won the same history prize at Harvard and each had the same position on the law review there."
Professor Lazarus said that as an advocate before the court, Judge Roberts had a precise practice regimen. He would divide up his argument into about eight sections and first memorize them and then practice reciting them in random order to account for the justices' questions.
"He looks relaxed and spontaneous," he said. "But it's all based on an extraordinary amount of work and preparation."
John Files and Glen Justice contributed reporting for this article. For more go to www.nytimes.com
|
|
|
|
|
 |
