July 25, 2005
Roberts vs. Ginsburg
The chances of John Roberts becoming a Justice of the Supreme Court is about 99%. Bush chose shrewdly and the Republicans are all loudly and in unison proclaiming Roberts’ virtues. Since 55% of the senators are Republicans, all they need do is stick together and Roberts will be confirmed. However, as a Democrat, I would like to demonstrate a few differences between a justice you get from a Republican like George W. Bush (Roberts) with a justice you get from a Democrat like Bill Clinton (Ruth Bader Ginsurg).
President George W. Bush has said many times that he would choose a judicial candidate like Justice Scalia. Republicans are running around insisting that Roberts is not like Scalia. But practically all of them admit that Roberts would move the Court to the right of where O'Connor was. Of course, Ginsburg is to the left of O'Connor.
The terms "left" and "right" have been so overused they have lost much of their meaning. So, to point out differences between Roberts and Ginsburg, let's see what these two have actually done (excluding abortion and other religiously-related matters):
- CORPORATE VS. CIVIL RIGHTS - Roberts was a corporate lawyer at Hogan & Hartson, the largest law firm based in D.C., where he was paid more than $1 million in 2003. Ginsburg was a civil rights lawyer serving as the ACLU’s General Counsel from 1973–1980, and on the National Board of Directors from 1974–1980; I doubt that she earned anywhere near $1 million in yearly pay.
- EMPLOYER VS. EMPLOYEES - Roberts represented employers; Ginsburg represented employees. Roberts represented Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc., arguing in the Supreme Court that a worker with carpal tunnel syndrome is not disabled and is not entitled to accommodation at work under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Ginsburg acted in favor of employees when she dissented from the Court majority that ruled that public agencies can control when employee compensatory time is used. She said:
"In my judgment, the fact that no employer may lawfully make any use of 'comp time' without a prior agreement with the affected employees is of critical importance."
- BUSINESS VS. ENVIRONMENT - Roberts acts for business; Ginsburg acts for a healthy environment. Roberts submitted an amicus brief on behalf of mining companies that extract coal by blasting the tops off of mountains and depositing the debris in nearby valleys and streams, thus ruining the environment. Ginsburg, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that the EPA may act to block construction of a new major pollutant-emitting facility in Alaska
- ELITE VS. ORDINARY CITIZENS - Roberts worked with the elite; Ginsburg worked with all kinds of citizens. Roberts thought that Vice-President Cheney should be allowed to keep the proceedings of his Energy Task Force secret as a matter of right. Ginsburg ruled that the use of race in the University of Michigan Law School's admissions decisions is allowed
Unfortunately, Roberts will be confirmed and the Court will shift further toward the positions of Big Business and the elites. If you would like a Supreme Court justice that wants justice for all of us and not only for the privileged few, there is only one way to achieve this:
You must vote for Democratic senators.Posted by Paul Siegel at July 25, 2005 06:05 PM
You must vote for Democratic senators.
Posted by Paul Siegel at July 25, 2005 06:05 PM
Just passing through and noticed the above quote, I could not agree with any statement more, Well stated Paul Siegal.
As Always,
Wayne
If you want to restore checks and balances, you have to vote for Democratic or Third Party or some Independent Senators. The three branches of Government are losing their effectiveness as checks and balances against each other through political manipulation of the laws and policies.
Posted by: David R. Remer at July 25, 2005 07:08 PMI think however, Roberts will be one of those Justices who sees the wisdom of not allowing Congress to marginalize the Judiciary in the future as it has these last 5 years.
Posted by: David R. Remer at July 25, 2005 07:09 PMActually Paul, I’ve found that the exact opposite is true. The left is anything BUT for the little guy. This is as about a false dichotomy as ever was. Just ponder the last democratic presidential candidate. John Kerry. Therezzza (Billionairess) Heinz-Kerry. Did either of these two actually make the billions of dollars they enjoy?
You’ll find that the Democratic party is the party of the rich.
At it’s root this kind of corporate bashing is not about the working man, (the proletariat), it’s about rival economic power. Private corporations are the enemy only because the left sees them as the only force potent enough to oppose complete government control of all economic facets of life.
I’m hoping that someday the left will progress beyond 100 year old marxist talking points.
Posted by: ericsimonson at July 25, 2005 08:04 PMActually Paul, I’ve found that the exact opposite is true. The left is anything BUT for the little guy. This is as about a false dichotomy as ever was. Just ponder the last democratic presidential candidate. John Kerry. Therezzza (Billionairess) Heinz-Kerry. Did either of these two actually make the billions of dollars they enjoy?You’ll find that the Democratic party is the party of the rich.
Democratic presidential candidate’s wife has family money = Democratic party is the “party of the rich?”
*scratches head*
Okay….
Posted by: mattLaw at July 25, 2005 08:33 PMEMPLOYER VS. EMPLOYEES
Libs are always good for a laugh. A few years ago you guys were screaming your heads off (rigthfully so) when Ebbers, Lay, and Kozlowski (EMPLOYEES!!!!!) were stealing from little old ladies who put there life savings into owning the company stock (EMPLOYERS!!). Now you are complaining cause someone got a sore wrist from working at home, and is now trying to screw over the little old lady stockholders and the hard working colleagues.
My CARPal tunnel syndrome always seems to flare up around the beginning of fishing season too.
Posted by: Peter at July 25, 2005 09:06 PMA few years ago you guys were screaming your heads off (rigthfully so) when Ebbers, Lay, and Kozlowski (EMPLOYEES!!!!!) were stealing from little old ladies who put there life savings into owning the company stock (EMPLOYERS!!).
Referring to company executives as “employees” and to company employees who were given company stock as “employers” is just a tad disingenuous.
What is carpal tunnel syndrome? Do you know? Is it a made-up ailment?
Posted by: mattLaw at July 25, 2005 09:34 PMRoberts should be confirmed, and rather easily. There are hardly any “extraordinary” circumstances here, and there likely won’t be any surprises, and he’s spent much of his career inside the Beltway. This makes him something of a known quantity. I found it amusing that a few in congress offered to “help†Bush chose a candidate. Maybe Judge Roberts can assist in a “rewrite†of our Constitution ……..until a Dem has an opportunity to appoint a justice of course.
Posted by: Curmudgeon-a-large at July 25, 2005 09:49 PMRoberts should be confirmed, and rather easily. There are hardly any “extraordinary” circumstances here, and there likely won’t be any surprises, and he’s spent much of his career inside the Beltway. This makes him something of a known quantity. I found it amusing that a few in congress offered to “help†Bush chose a candidate. Maybe Judge Roberts can assist in a “rewrite†of our Constitution ……..until a Dem has an opportunity to appoint a justice of course.
…and many of those on the evil ‘left’ don’t have a problem with him.
Seven of the nine current justices were placed there by Republican presidents, FYI.
Posted by: mattLaw at July 25, 2005 09:53 PMEven though I am a strong Democrat, I believe that Roberts may provide consurvative twist on things plus Rhinquest probably won’t be around too much longer and God willing Hilary will be be in office by then and I for sure know we’ll be getting a Ginsburg instead of another Roberts. My purpose of being a Democrat isn’t to have a constant liberal mindset but to be able to explore the different avenues of politics without being chastised like I would be if I were a Republican. True, I think that whoever is nominated needs more cradetials of being on the bench than what Roberts currently has but the fact is that Roberts is going to be appointed and I suppose I’m just in some kind of funky denial about the whole situation. Keep in mind that Bush won’t be in office forever and that 2008 will be remembered as the year that the Democrats struck back! Cheesey, I know yet somewhat affective like you’ve first read.
Posted by: Arliss at July 25, 2005 10:09 PMGood article, Paul. Anybody want to bet a dollar Roberts will be wishy-washy on “culture” issues, but consistently anti-labor on business issues?
eric, you crack me up. That’s the most dizzying spin I’ve seen in a long time. Wheee! :D
BTW, Roberts now says he “doesn’t remember” belonging to the Federalist Society. He’d better watch out, cause if it turns out he paid dues, then he’s a liar. That would make his confirmation a whole new ballgame. Anybody remember Kerik?
Hilary will be be in office by then
GOD HELP US!!!!
Posted by: Kirk at July 26, 2005 09:13 PMOk folks, first off, of the richest 12 Senators, 9 are Democrats. They all have money.
We the people must push for term limits on all politicians - 12 years max for any congressman/woman.
We must push for a national sales tax and eliminate the income tax, rescind the amendment that gives the gov’t power to do this. This will save billions by eliminating the IRS.
As for Roberts and Ginsburg, Roberts has shown he has interpreted the law as it is written, not what he wants it to mean. Ginsburg wants to write law, not interpret it. Being a lawyer for the ACLU speaks volumes for me because the ACLU is a punch of communists that hate America.
Think with your heads and vote for the person that best represents American values: Freedom of the individual and upholds the Constitution as are founding fathers wrote it. The federal government is too big and involved too much in everyone’s life, this was not the original intent the federal government. Of course our society has become pretty lazy and everyone wants something for nothing, including dead beats and big business.
Our States have lost their rights. Madison said, the state laws are numerous and limitless while the Constitution limits the power of the federal government. If only we the people would listen and undestand what Madison wrote.
I pray we don’t become like Europe.
Posted by: steve at July 27, 2005 07:30 AMWe the people must push for term limits on all politicians - 12 years max for any congressman/woman.
steve, I like the job Senator Boxer is doing. I think I’ll keep electing her as long as she’ll keep running - 12 years, 60 years, whatever.
I agree that we should use our heads when we vote. I totally disagree with just about everything else you wrote.
American Pundit,
Senator Boxer representing the United Socialist States of America, she ranks right there with Arlen Specter….it is time for all of them to go.
The purpose of the courts is to interpret the law created by Congress, not create their own. You are probably a communist living in a September 10, 2001 world.
Posted by: steve at July 27, 2005 03:02 PMCheers Steve. I couldn’t agree more. The Democratic party has been overrun by left wing pacifists since the 1960s. They are so anti-war that they lose site of what it takes to protect the US. Senator Boxer, Michael Moore, “insert any Hollywood pinhead here”, and 48% of the US electorate, think that freedom comes free. They believe they can eliminate religion and not have to replace it with some sort of ethical code. The past 35 years have proven secularism a failure. Today’s society is a selfish “it’s all about me” bunch of babies. This country could use a good healthy dose of September 12th, 2001 living. Remember, they wouldn’t feel the same way as they argue in their posts if they had loved ones in the Twin Towers that were killed. You can bet your last dollar, before the local, state and federal government tax it.
Posted by: Dan M. at July 27, 2005 03:16 PMAhh… the name calling. So typical of the right when confronted with reality. I guess that means I win. You guys obviously can’t match my command of reason and facts.
Posted by: American Pundit at July 28, 2005 09:53 AM
