Nomination of John Roberts

NOMINATION OF JOHN ROBERTS -- (Senate - September 12, 2005)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Maryland for organizing the AskRoberts.com in which we are all participating to allow people across this country to be a part of this very important process that is occurring in the Senate today.

Today, our country faces many challenges. We look at the suffering along the gulf coast, we face ongoing military operations in Iraq and in Afghanistan, and we face the solemn and significant task of not only filling two Court vacancies but confirming a new Chief Justice. While the confirmation of a new Justice may not be the topic of dinner table conversations across the country tonight, the actions of the next Supreme Court Justice will impact the lives of every American family for generations to come.

Last week, this Chamber mourned the passing of Chief Justice Rehnquist who served on our Nation's highest Court for over three decades. The great range of issues on which the Supreme Court ruled during Justice Rehnquist's tenure--from Roe v. Wade to capital punishment to Miranda rights to the conclusion of a Presidential election--shows the American public just how closely the Court touches each of our daily lives. My home State of Washington is 3,000 miles away from the Nation's Capital, but the issues the Supreme Court takes up, whether it be title IX or eminent domain or a woman's right to choose, hits home for them as well.

Back in 1991, when I was a State Senator and a former school board member and a mother, I watched the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings that came before the Senate Judiciary Committee. For days and days, I sat in frustration at home. I simply could not believe that this nominee was not asked about the issues about which I cared. I did not believe the Senators in that room were representing me or asking the questions I wanted answered. So I did something about it: I ran for the U.S. Senate. Now, thankfully, I am here and I can get my questions answered. But I remain very concerned for the women and the men in my State and around the country. Certainly they have issues that are important to them that will come before the Supreme Court. Certainly they have questions they want answered. Not everyone is going to be able to run for the Senate, but everyone should be able to have their voice heard.

This is a process in which the American public deserves to be involved. Judge Roberts is being considered for a lifetime appointment, and the American people deserve to know where he stands on a number of issues that affect our Nation's future. That desire to give Americans around the country a voice in this process is what inspired me and my colleagues from California and Maryland to set up a Web site: AskRoberts.com. Through our Web site, we have collected tens of thousands of questions over the past several months that have now been delivered to the Senate Judiciary Committee in hopes that they will be asked of Judge Roberts during his confirmation hearing.

This is not an inside-the-beltway debate. Judge Roberts has been nominated to a lifetime appointment on the highest Court in the land, and he will influence our path on issues ranging across the spectrum.

Many Americans must be wondering what this all means to them, how it will affect them. Let me make it clear: This debate we are now having is about whether we want to protect essential rights and liberties, including the right to privacy about which the Senator from California talked. This debate is about whether we want free and open government. This debate is about whether we want a clean, healthy environment and the ability to enforce laws to protect it fairly. And this debate is about preserving equal protection under the law.

Judge Roberts has an obligation--not to the Senate but to the American people--to make his views known on these basic values. Only then can we make a reasoned judgment on his nomination. That is why I have joined with a number of my colleagues in calling on the Attorney General to fulfill the request that was made by our colleagues on the Judiciary Committee for documents related to 16 key cases on which Judge Roberts played a leadership role during his service as Solicitor General. Not only is there precedent for the disclosure of those documents--similar information was provided to the Senate when it considered the nomination of Justice Rehnquist--but there is also clear imperative. If we are going to fulfill our constitutional duty to provide meaningful advice and consent on this nomination, that consent must be informed and this process must be opened, not only to the Members of this body but to the American people.

With the questions and concerns of Americans from coast to coast in mind, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that the President's nominee to fill this position will be fair and impartial, evenhanded in administering justice, and will protect the rights and liberties of all Americans.

Mr. President, I yield back my remaining time.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, as I understand it, we have 5 minutes before Senator Gregg has the floor; is that correct?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is correct.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I thank Senator Murray because she has a way of putting things quite succinctly and clearly and I appreciate her coming to the floor.

There is a very interesting editorial today in USA Today, and I want to quote from it. The first part says there is no question that the President has chosen someone with similar views to Judge Rehnquist. This is what they say:

But, if the men are similar, the nation is different now from what it was when Rehnquist joined the Court 33 years ago, and that difference raises provocative questions for Roberts as Senate confirmation hearings begin today.

This is how they say it has changed since Judge Rehnquist's hearings:

In particular, the United States has become a far more tolerant society. In 1972, racial segregation was still being dismantled. Women, like African-Americans, were routinely deprived of equal opportunity. The notion that Americans possess a right to privacy, established by the landmark 1965 Supreme Court case that overturned state laws against birth control, was still taking root.

This editorial goes on to ask if Roberts would make it difficult for Congress to extend those gains or even turn back the clock, concluding:

His record leaves plenty of room for doubt.

Now, this is USA Today. It is not considered a liberal newspaper. It is a pretty mainstream paper and it raises the issue of privacy, writing: In memos written when he was in the Reagan administration, Roberts disparaged the notion that there is a constitutional right to privacy that prevents the government from criminalizing contraception, abortion and gay sex.

And then it talks about race:

Roberts has belittled affirmative action as ``recruiting of inadequately prepared candidates'' and has argued for standards that would make it easier for school districts to evade desegregation orders.

On women's rights, it is also troubling:

Roberts ridiculed the concept that women are subject to workplace discrimination, and he argued for narrowing the government's ability to enforce the ban on gender discrimination in education.

They close by saying:

His record bears close scrutiny and his answers should go a long way toward determining whether he should be confirmed for a lifetime appointment as the Nation's most powerful jurist, deciding issues barely imaginable today and influencing the lives of generations to come.

As I say, this editorial is quite mainstream. It raises legitimate concerns about Judge Roberts. It basically says to the Senate, it is your job to find out how he is going to rule on cases we cannot even envision at this time.

I think that the committee is off to a good start. I received a briefing while I was on a plane today about the Senators' comments on both sides of the aisle. It clearly seems to be a confirmation that both sides are taking extremely seriously.

I say to those friends and colleagues on the other side who are counseling Judge Roberts that he does not have to answer questions, that would be a big mistake. The American people in poll after poll are saying to us, we have a right to know. We want to have answers to very important questions that will shed light on if Judge Roberts is going to make sure this Congress and this Federal Government can protect them; that we can protect the environment; equal rights for women and for minorities; that we have the ability to make life better for the American people; and that we, in fact, will be able to respect the dignity of our people by making sure there is not a ``so-called'' right to privacy but a fundamental right to privacy that has been articulated by the Court and that we hope Judge Roberts will uphold.

I yield the floor.

http://thomas.loc.gov/