USA Today - John Roberts Found "Deep Regard" for Supreme Court in Arguing Cases
July 20, 2005
By Joan Biskupic and
Toni Locy, USA TODAY
Judge John Roberts is a Washington insider with a solid reputation as a conservative. But at the Supreme Court, he is best known for extensive experience arguing cases in front of the justices.
Roberts, 50, grew up in Indiana and represented the government in 39 cases at the Supreme Court before becoming a judge two years ago when President Bush named him to the U.S. appeals court for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Rarely does a new justice bring that much direct experience as an advocate to the Supreme Court.
Of the current nine justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg had appeared before the justices in six cases as a women's rights advocate before her nomination, and Chief Justice William Rehnquist argued one case while he worked for the Justice Department.
Roberts said Tuesday night that his years arguing before the Supreme Court gave him "a deep regard" for it. "I always got a lump in my throat when I walked up those marble steps to the court," he said. He added that he didn't believe it was just a case of "nerves."
Whether he was nervous or not, Roberts has been superstitious about his high court appearances. Before each, he would touch the larger-than-life sculpture of Chief Justice John Marshall on the ground floor of the courthouse for luck. Once upstairs in the courtroom and standing at the lectern, Roberts would pull out a piece of paper on which he had written, just to remind himself in case he forgot, the standard greeting lawyers use to begin their presentation: "Mr. Chief Justice and may it please the court."
While Roberts would bring an unusually lengthy record as an appellate advocate and, as President Bush said Tuesday, "one of the best legal minds of his generation," he has a record as a strong conservative from his time in the Reagan and first Bush administrations that incited early criticism.
His abortion views
Robert's abortion views are likely to be the most contentious part of his Senate confirmation hearing.
As the principal deputy in the U.S. solicitor general's office from 1989 to 1993, Roberts helped craft the first Bush administration's legal strategy against Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that made abortion legal nationwide. The administration urged the justices to overturn Roe. In a separate case, Roberts personally argued the administration's position, siding with Operation Rescue and other demonstrators who blocked access to abortion clinics. The Supreme Court rebuffed the Bush administration's position in the first case, affirming Roe v. Wade in 1992 and ruled for Operation Rescue in the latter.
NARAL Pro-Choice America vowed Tuesday to oppose Roberts' nomination.
Nancy Keenan, president of the group, said, "We are extremely disappointed that President Bush has chosen such a divisive nominee for the highest court in the nation, rather than a consensus nominee who would protect individual liberty and uphold Roe v. Wade. President Bush has consciously chosen the path of confrontation, and he should know that we, and the 65% of Americans who support Roe, are ready for the battle ahead."
Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, which opposes abortion rights, said, "Judge Roberts is an exceptional choice who will bring sound legal reasoning to the Supreme Court of the United States. He was one of the most gifted advocates before the high court and has served with distinction on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., a member of the Judiciary Committee that will hold a confirmation hearing, said, "It is vital that Judge Roberts answer a wide range of questions openly, honestly, and fully in the coming months. His views will affect a generation of Americans and it is his obligation during the nomination process to let the American people know those views." He added, "The burden is on a nominee to the Supreme Court to prove that he is worthy, not on the Senate to prove he is unworthy.
Roberts grew up in Long Beach, Ind., on Lake Michigan. His father managed a steel plant. His mother was a homemaker. Roberts went to Harvard for undergraduate study and for law school, then was a law clerk to New York federal appeals Judge Henry Friendly.
In 1980-81, Roberts clerked for then-associate Justice Rehnquist and since then has never worked outside Washington, becoming part of the legal elite. For two decades, he was a quintessential D.C. lawyer who went back and forth from government service to private practice.
He steadily climbed through the ranks of the Justice Department during the Reagan and first Bush administrations. He eventually became a principal deputy to solicitor general Kenneth Starr in 1989.
Along the way he made friends with both influential Republicans and Democrats. After he was nominated for the court of appeals, more than 150 lawyers, including officials from the Clinton administration, signed a letter urging his appeals court confirmation.
The president said Tuesday that some of the lawyers who signed the letter had worked as counselors to Republican and Democratic presidents. Former Clinton solicitors general Walter Dellinger and Seth Waxman were among those supporting his nomination.
Roberts has been widely respected for his intellect and his diligence. When he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2003 for his position on the D.C. Circuit, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said, "Three of the justices have told me John Roberts is the best."
The first President Bush nominated Roberts in 1992 for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. But his nomination died when the Democratic-controlled Senate did not act on his nomination. Roberts returned to private practice and built up his appellate practice. His cases were varied and his contacts reached across the political spectrum.
As an appellate judge, Roberts has been measured and controlled in his opinions.
In a 2003 dissent in a case involving the migration of arroyo toads in California, Roberts wanted the case to be reconsidered by the entire D.C. Circuit. He wrote that he believed that a three-judge panel had misread Supreme Court cases and the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
He said the three-judge panel's approach inappropriately resulted in treating "the taking of a hapless toad that, for reasons of its own, lives its entire life in California" as commerce among several states.
But Roberts was respectful of the panel's decision. He argued that because the decision was at odds with another appellate court that the entire D.C. Circuit should consider the matter: "Such review would also afford the opportunity to consider alternative grounds ... that may be more consistent with Supreme Court precedent."
In 2004, Roberts wrote the opinion for a unanimous three-judge panel that ruled that a 12-year-old girl's rights were not violated when she was arrested for eating a single french fry on the Washington subway. "No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation," he wrote.
Roberts said the panel agreed with the trial judge that issuing a citation to a child would be meaningless without assurances that a parent were notified. The city of Washington and the subway system had a policy that required the arrest and detention of a minor until picked up by a parent.
"The district court and we too may have thoughts on the wisdom of this policy choice -it is far from clear that the gains in certainty of notification are worth the youthful trauma and tears - but it is not our place to second-guess such legislative judgments," he wrote.
On the bench
The road ahead Here is what's in store for John Roberts, President Bush's choice for the Supreme Court vacancy created by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's resignation:
* Former senator Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., an actor on TV's Law & Order, will escort Roberts around the Capitol and make introductions before senators leave town for their August recess.
* The Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI and the American Bar Association will conduct background checks and research Roberts' legal views. That usually takes three to four weeks.
* Roberts will prepare for confirmation hearings.
* The Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing. Roberts, his supporters and critics will testify. It could last as little as two days.
* If Roberts is approved by the committee, the full Senate will vote, usually within a week or two of the Judiciary panel vote.
* The next term of the Supreme Court begins Oct. 3.
Contributing Source: USA TODAY research
The Roberts file: A look at President Bush's top choice:
Age: 50. Born Jan. 27, 1955, in Buffalo. Grew up in Indiana, one of four children, and attended Catholic school.
Education: Bachelor's degree, Harvard College, 1976. Law degree, Harvard Law School, 1979.
Family: Wife, Jane, a lawyer; son, John (Jack), 4, and daughter, Josephine (Josie), 5.
Now: U.S. Court of Appeals judge, D.C. Circuit, based in Washington.
Background: Appointed to the appeals court by President Bush in 2003. Roberts had been an associate and partner in the Washington law firm Hogan & Hartson 1986-89 and 1993-2003.He worked in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, including as principal deputy U.S. solicitor general from 1989 to 1993, representing the U.S. government before the Supreme Court in 39 cases. He was special assistant to Attorney General William French Smith 1981-82 and a clerk to Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist 1980-81, before Rehnquist became chief justice.
The skinny: Roberts was first nominated to a U.S. appeals court by the first President Bush, but the nomination did not get a Senate hearing before Bush's term ended. In private practice, he was a frequent and successful advocate before the Supreme Court, often representing business clients.His two-year tenure on the D.C. Circuit has not produced any highly controversial rulings. In the solicitor general's office, he co-wrote a legal brief that urged the court to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Contributing Source: USA TODAY research