|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
PERSPECTIVES:
John Roberts Nomination as Chief Justice
September 9, 2005 Episode no. 902
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
BOB ABERNETHY, anchor: Next week, the Senate begins hearings on the nomination of Judge John Roberts to be the new chief justice of the United States, and we want to talk about that process and what's at stake with Tim O'Brien, who's covered the court for many years, often for this program. He's an analyst for Fox News and a distinguished visiting professor at Nova Southeastern University Law School in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Tim, welcome.
TIM O'BRIEN (Contributing Correspondent): Thank you.
ABERNETHY: Walk us through the confirmation process, would you?
O'BRIEN: It begins Monday afternoon. The senators will make opening statements, about 10 minutes each, followed by the nominee, John Roberts, making his opening statement for about 15 minutes, and that's it for the first day. The fireworks, if there are any, and I surely think there will be some, will begin the next day, on Tuesday morning, when Roberts begins his own testimony. There will be one or two days of testimony by Roberts; then Thursday and Friday the interest groups, and the whole confirmation hearing should be over by Friday. And then on the following Tuesday they vote, and after that it goes to the Senate, presumably.
ABERNETHY: And with what result? What's your expectation?
O'BRIEN: I have two expectations. Initially, a lot of people thought that he would just sail through. That's not going to be the case. This will not be a cakewalk. I think there will be a lot of very pointed questions from Democrats. But in the final analysis the expectation is that, barring something we don't know, he'll be confirmed.
ABERNETHY: Do you expect religion to come up in that confirmation process? Roberts is a Catholic. Do you expect him to be asked, what is the relationship between his faith and his work as a judge?
|
 |
 |
 |
O'BRIEN: Religion will certainly come up. It's one of the most divisive issues at the court right now. So they're going to be asking about his views of separation of church and state. But I also wouldn't be surprised if some questions came up about his own devotion to the church and whether that might influence his judgment. He has spoken out on this in the past, recommending devout Christians for jobs in the White House many years ago and making the case that these people are very qualified and capable of separating their work from their religious belief, and I think that will be his approach.
ABERNETHY: And, quickly, what are the most important cases relating to religion that will be coming up for this court?
O'BRIEN: Well, there is a very important case coming up on the second day of the term involving a medical-religious issue, so to speak -- physician-assisted dying -- whether doctors, in this case in the state of Oregon, may assist the terminally ill, prescribing lethal drugs that can end their lives. Also, there's an important abortion rights case involving juveniles seeking abortion and the requirement in New Hampshire that they get parental notification. Another case -- very important -- involves a religious group in New Mexico who wants to import a hallucinogenic drug that's a controlled substance that's not allowed in the United States, but they want to use it to practice their religion. The lower court said the government cannot stop them.
ABERNETHY: Tim, let me change the subject just a minute. Many of us have been looking at the rescue efforts in New Orleans and recently have seen rescue workers going into homes and taking people out, taking residents out by force. Is that constitutional?
O'BRIEN: It is when the governor declares martial law and authorizes, specifically, National Guard troops to do that. That has not happened here. At least the governor says that's not going to be the role of the National Guard. So the National Guard really can't do it, not at this point. Now there's some confusion as to whether local authorities can. In some circumstances, where a life is clearly in jeopardy, they can. But there's some ambiguity about whether some people there have exceeded their authority.
ABERNETHY: Tim O'Brien, many thanks.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Related R&E Material:
Senate Confirmation Hearings on John Roberts, September 2, 2005
U.S. Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts, July 22, 2005
Commentary on Supreme Court Nominee John Roberts, July 22, 2005
First Amendment and the Founding Fathers, July 1, 2005
Catholic Politicians, May 14, 2004
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|

|

|

|
 |
Related Links:
USA Today: "Roberts, Rehnquist compel comparisions" by Joan Biskupic, September 7, 2005
Ethics and Public Policy Center: Open Letter to Sen. Patrick Leahy by George Weigel, September 6, 2005
Becket Fund for Religious Liberty: Open Letter to Senators Warns Against Religious Test for Office, September 6, 2005
Washington Post: "Roberts hearings likely to enter religious territory" by Shailaigh Murray, September 5, 2005
Kansas City Star: "Issues of faith envelop Roberts" by Bill Tammeus, August 20, 2005
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|