Roberts Wows the Critics
John Roberts's initial appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee was impressive, by all accounts. He delivered a heartfelt opening statement, without a note before him, which apparently blew away most observers. Tim Russert called it a "very good debut;" others, like Alan Dershowitz, were more effusive. Dershowitz said it was "brilliant" and "couldn't have been better." Chris Wallace described Roberts' performance as "very impressive."
Of course, it didn't hurt that Roberts got to follow the usual pompous statements by Senators. I'm sure the contrast was painful. Roberts is one of the most talented and accomplished people in the legal profession, so I'm not surprised at the perceived quality of his performance. It will be interesting to see whether the rave reviews make any difference in how the Democrats treat Roberts for the duration of the hearing.
Confirm Them has the transcript of Roberts's opening statement. Some excerpts:
My personal appreciation that I owe a great debt to others reinforces my view that a certain humility should characterize the judicial role.Judges and justices are servants of the law, not the other way around. Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules; they apply them.
The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules.
But it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ball game to see the umpire.
***
Mr. Chairman, when I worked in the Department of Justice, in the office of the solicitor general, it was my job to argue cases for the United States before the Supreme court.
I always found it very moving to stand before the justices and say, I speak for my country.
But it was after I left the department and began arguing cases against the United States that I fully appreciated the importance of the Supreme Court and our constitutional system.
Here was the United States, the most powerful entity in the world, aligned against my client. And, yet, all I had to do was convince the court that I was right on the law and the government was wrong and all that power and might would recede in deference to the rule of law.
That is a remarkable thing.
It is what we mean when we say that we are a government of laws and not of men. It is that rule of law that protects the rights and liberties of all Americans. It is the envy of the world. Because without the rule of law, any rights are meaningless.
***
Mr. Chairman, I come before the committee with no agenda.
I have no platform.
Judges are not politicians who can promise to do certain things in exchange for votes.
I have no agenda, but I do have a commitment. If I am confirmed, I will confront every case with an open mind. I will fully and fairly analyze the legal arguments that are presented. I will be open to the considered views of my colleagues on the bench. And I will decide every case based on the record, according to the rule of law, without fear or favor, to the best of my ability. And I will remember that it’s my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat.
