| John G. Roberts, Jr. |
Article Index for John G |
Articles about John Roberts |
Website Links For John Roberts |
Information AboutJohn G. Roberts, Jr. |
John Glover Roberts, Jr. (born January 27 , 1955 ) is the seventeenth and current Chief Justice Of The United States . Before joining the Supreme Court , Roberts was a judge on the United States Court Of Appeals For The District Of Columbia Circuit , spent 14 years in Private Law Practice and held positions in Republican administrations in the U.S. Department Of Justice and Office Of The White House Counsel . PERSONAL LIFE, EDUCATION, AND MEMBERSHIPS Roberts was born in Buffalo , New York , on January 27 , 1955 , son of John G. Roberts and Rosemary Podrasky. His father was an executive with Bethlehem Steel . When Roberts was in second grade, his family moved to the affluent beachside town of Long Beach, Indiana . He grew up in a devoutly Roman Catholic , upper middle-class home along with three sisters: Kathy, Peggy and Barbara. Roberts graduated first in his high school class of 1973 from La Lumiere School , a Catholic Boarding School in LaPorte, Indiana . He studied six years of Latin and some French , and was known for his devotion to his studies. He was also captain of his Football team, where he referred to himself as a "slow-footed Linebacker ." He also Wrestled , participated in choir and drama, co-edited the school newspaper, and served on the athletic council and the Executive Committee of the Student Council. Following high school, Roberts entered '' in 1976. Roberts then attended Harvard Law School , where he served as managing editor of the Harvard Law Review and graduated '' Magna Cum Laude '' in 1979. Roberts is currently a member of the American Academy Of Appellate Lawyers , the American Law Institute , the Edward Coke Appellate American Inn Of Court and the National Legal Center For The Public Interest . He serves on the Federal Appellate Rules Advisory Committee . Roberts is married to Jane Sullivan Roberts, a lawyer, former legal counsel for introduction of his father brought the four-year-old international media attention. Josie and Jack attend a private school. PRIVATE PRACTICE After graduating from law school, Roberts served as a Law Clerk for Judge Henry Friendly on the Second Circuit Court Of Appeals for one year. From 1980 to 1981, he served as a law clerk to then-Associate Justice William Rehnquist on the United States Supreme Court. From 1981 to 1982, he served in the Reagan administration as a Special Assistant to U.S. Attorney General William French Smith . From 1982 to 1986, Roberts served as Associate Counsel to the President under White House Counsel Fred Fielding . Roberts entered private law practice in 1990 as an associate at the Washington, D.C. -based Law Firm of Hogan & Hartson , but left to serve in the first Bush administration as Principal Deputy Solicitor General from 1989 to 1993. During this time, Roberts argued 39 cases for the government before the Supreme Court, prevailing in 25 of them. He represented 18 states in '' United States V. Microsoft ''. In 1992, George H.W. Bush nominated Roberts to the U.S. Court Of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, but no Senate vote was held, and Roberts's nomination expired when Bush left office after losing the 1992 Presidential Election . Roberts returned to Hogan & Hartson as a partner, and became the head of the firm's appellate practice, in addition to serving as an adjunct faculty member at the Georgetown University Law Center . In his capacity as head of Hogan & Hartson's appellate practice, Roberts argued several cases before the Supreme Court: U.S. COURT OF APPEALS George W. Bush nominated Roberts to the Court Of Appeals For The District Of Columbia Circuit on May 9 , 2001 , but the nomination — along with 29 others — failed to make it out of the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. He was renominated on January 7 , 2003 , to replace James L. Buckley . His nomination was approved by the Judiciary Committee by a vote of 16 to 3, with Senators Richard Durbin , Charles Schumer and Ted Kennedy opposing. However, he was approved by the Senate under Unanimous Consent and he received his Commission on June 2 , 2003 . At the time Roberts left private practice to join the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, he reported in a financial disclosure filing in 2005 that he earned a salary of $1,044,399, had many Stock s (including Pharmaceutical and technology investments, such as holdings in Pfizer and Procter & Gamble ), and a one-eighth interest in a cottage in the village of Knocklong , County Limerick , Republic Of Ireland , his wife's ancestral homeland, valued at $15,000 or less. U.S. SUPREME COURT Nomination and confirmation See Also: John Roberts Supreme Court nomination and hearings On July 19 , 2005 , President Bush Nominated Roberts to the U.S. Supreme Court , to fill a vacancy which would be left by the announced retirement of Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor . Roberts was the first Supreme Court nominee since Stephen Breyer in 1994 . Bush announced Roberts's nomination in a live, nationwide Television broadcast from the East Room of the White House . Following the September 3 2005 death of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist , Bush withdrew Roberts's nomination as O'Connor's successor, and on September 6 , announced of Roberts's new nomination to the position of Chief Justice. Bush asked the Senate to expedite Roberts's confirmation hearings in order to fill the vacancy by the beginning of the Supreme Court's session in early October. John Roberts follows in the footsteps of former Chief Justice Warren Burger who was also elevated to the position of Chief Justice directly from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. On September 22 the Senate Judiciary Committee approved Roberts's nomination by a vote of 13-5, with Senators Ted Kennedy , Richard Durbin , Charles Schumer , Joe Biden and Dianne Feinstein the dissenting votes. Roberts was confirmed by the full Senate on September 29 , passing by a margin of 78-22 . All Republicans and the lone Independent voted for Roberts; the Democrats split evenly, 22 for and 22 against. Roberts was confirmed by what was, historically, a narrow margin for a Supreme Court justice. This reflects the increasing politicization and partisanship of Supreme Court nominations, though this margin was greater than the 1986 65-33 vote confirming Roberts' predecessor, William Rehnquist. Supreme Court career in the East Room of the White House , September 29 , 2005 .]] On September 29 , just hours after his Senate confirmation, Roberts took the Constitutional Oath Of Office , which was administered by senior Associate Justice John Paul Stevens at the White House . He took the judicial oath provided for by the Judiciary Act Of 1789 on October 3 2005 at the United States Supreme Court Building , prior to the first oral arguments of the 2005 term. At 50, Roberts is the third-youngest man to have become Chief Justice ( John Jay was appointed at age 44 in 1789 while John Marshall was appointed at age 45 in 1801). However, many Associate Justices, including Justices Antonin Scalia (appointed at age 50 in 1986) and Clarence Thomas (appointed at age 43 in 1991), have joined the Court at a younger age than Roberts. Former Chief Justice Rehnquist was 47 when he was appointed as an Associate Justice in 1972. Roberts presided over his first oral arguments on October 3 , 2005 , when the Court began its 2005-2006 session. Ending a week's worth of idle speculation, Roberts opted to wear a plain black robe on his first day, eschewing the gold sleeve-bars added to the Chief Justice's robes by his predecessor. On ''. In that case, the Supreme Court held that the Oregon law permitting physician-assisted suicide did not conflict with the Controlled Substances Act . The majority consisted of Justices Breyer, Ginsberg, Kennedy, O'Connor, Souter, and Stevens. Roberts joined Justices Scalia and Thomas in dissenting from the Court's decision. On March 6 , 2006 , Roberts wrote the unanimous decision in '' Rumsfeld V. Forum For Academic And Institutional Rights '' that colleges that accept federal money must allow military recruiters on campus, despite university objections to the Pentagon 's " Don't Ask, Don't Tell " policy on gays in the military. Roberts wrote his first dissent in the case '' Georgia V. Randolph '', decided March 22 , 2006 . The majority's decision prohibited police from searching a home if one occupant objects while another consents. Roberts' dissent expressed concern that this might invite dire consequences for one spouse who attempts to consent to a search against the wishes of the other. JURISPRUDENCE During Judiciary Committee hearings on his nomination to the circuit court, Roberts testified about his views on jurisprudence. {Link without Title} The Commerce Clause :“Starting with '' McCulloch V. Maryland '', Chief Justice John Marshall gave a very broad and expansive reading to the powers of the Federal Government and explained that—and I don't remember the exact quote—but if the ends be legitimate, then any means chosen to achieve them are within the power of the Federal Government, and cases interpreting that, throughout the years, have come down. Certainly, by the time '' Lopez '' was decided, many of us had learned in Law School that it was just sort of a formality to say that Interstate Commerce was affected and that cases weren't going to be thrown out that way. ''Lopez'' certainly breathed new life into the Commerce Clause . :“I think it remains to be seen, in subsequent decisions, how rigorous a showing, and in many cases, it is just a showing. It's not a question of an abstract fact, does this affect interstate commerce or not, but has this body, the Congress, demonstrated the impact on interstate commerce that drove them to legislate? That's a very important factor. It wasn't present in ''Lopez'' at all. I think the members of Congress had heard the same thing I had heard in law school, that this is unimportant—and they hadn't gone through the process of establishing a record in that case.” {Link without Title} Federalism :“Simply because you have a problem that needs addressing, it's not necessarily the case that Federal legislation is the best way to address it…. The constitutional limitation doesn't turn on whether it's a good idea. There is not a ‘good idea’ clause in the Constitution. It can be a bad idea, but certainly still satisfy the constitutional requirements.” {Link without Title} Roberts dissented in Gonzales V. Oregon , which held that the United States Attorney General could not enforce the Controlled Substances Act against physicians prescribing drugs for the assisted suicide of the terminally ill as permitted by an Oregon law. Judicial activism and deference to legislatures :“The Supreme Court has, throughout its history, on many occasions described the deference that is due to legislative judgments. Justice Holmes described assessing the constitutionality of an act of Congress as the gravest duty that the Supreme Court is called upon to perform…. It's a principle that is easily stated and needs to be observed in practice, as well as in theory. :“Now, the Court, of course, has the obligation, and has been recognized since '' Marbury V. Madison '', to assess the constitutionality of acts of Congress, and when those acts are challenged, it is the obligation of the Court to say what the law is. The determination of when deference to legislative policy judgments goes too far and becomes abdication of the judicial responsibility, and when scrutiny of those judgments goes too far on the part of the judges and becomes what I think is properly called Judicial Activism , that is certainly the central dilemma of having an unelected, as you describe it correctly, undemocratic judiciary in a democratic republic.” {Link without Title} In referring to '' Brown V. Board '' that overturned school Segregation : “the Court in that case, of course, overruled a prior decision. I don't think that constitutes judicial activism because obviously if the decision is wrong, it should be overruled. That's not activism. That's applying the law correctly.” ''Roe v. Wade'' In his Senate testimony, Roberts acknowledged that, on the for speculation about Roberts's current views, concerns about these views raised in the hearings, and the potential impact they might have on his actions in the Supreme Court.) JUDICIAL OPINIONS Roberts has authored 49 opinions in his two years in the D.C. Circuit but has elicited only two dissents on his decisions, and on the many other cases he has heard in that time, he has authored only three dissenting opinions of his own. Because of this short record, Roberts does not have an extensive case history from which a general approach to the Constitution can be determined, and he appears not to have publicly stated his views on the subject. He has even said that "I do not think beginning with an all-encompassing approach to constitutional interpretation is the best way to faithfully construe the document." {Link without Title} Cass Sunstein , a law professor at the University Of Chicago argues that in general, Roberts appears to be a Judicial Minimalist , emphasizing precedent, as opposed to an Originalism -oriented or rights-focused jurist. "Judge Roberts's opinions thus far are careful, lawyerly and narrow. They avoid broad pronouncements. They do not try to reorient the law." {Link without Title} . His past rulings have included the following issues: Fourth and Fifth Amendments The D.C. Circuit case '' "no eating" policy in a Washington D.C. Metro station by eating a single French Fry . Roberts wrote for a 3-0 panel affirming a district court decision that dismissed the girl's complaint, which was predicated on the Fourth and Fifth Amendments , specifically the claim that an adult would have only received a citation for the same offense, while children must be detained until parents are notified. Roberts began his opinion by noting, "No one is very happy about the events that led to this litigation," and pointing out that the policies under which the girl was apprehended had since been changed. Because age discrimination is allowed under previous jurisprudence if there is any Rational Basis for it, only weak state interests were required to justify the policy. "Because parents and guardians play an essential role in that rehabilitative process, it is reasonable for the District to seek to ensure their participation, and the method chosen — detention until the parent is notified and retrieves the child — certainly does that, in a way issuing a citation might not." Roberts concluded that the Age Discrimination and detention in this case were constitutional, noting that "the question before us... is not whether these policies were a bad idea, but whether they violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution.", language reminiscent of Justice Potter Stewart 's dissent in '' Griswold V. Connecticut '', in which Justice Stewart wrote, "''We are not asked in this case to say whether we think this law is unwise, or even asinine. We are asked to hold that it violates the United States Constitution. And that, I cannot do.''" Military tribunals In ''), could be tried by a military court because: # the military commission had the approval of Congress ; # the Third Geneva Convention is a Treaty between nations and as such it does not confer Individual Rights and remedies enforceable in U.S. courts; # even if the Convention could be enforced in U.S. courts, it would not be of assistance to Hamdan at the time because, for a conflict such as the War Against Al-Qaeda (considered by the court as a separate war from that against Afghanistan itself) that is not between two countries, it guarantees only a certain standard of judicial procedure without speaking to the jurisdiction in which the prisoner must be tried. The court held open the possibility of judicial review of the results of the military commission after the current proceedings have ended (see). Environmental regulation On the U.S. Court of Appeals, Roberts wrote a dissenting opinion regarding ''Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton'', 323 F.3d 1062 , a case involving the protection of a rare California toad under the '' and '' United States V. Morrison '' in that it focused on the effects of the regulation, rather than the taking of the toads themselves, on Interstate Commerce . In Roberts's view, the Commerce Clause of the Constitution did not permit the government to regulate activity affecting what he called "a hapless toad" that "for reasons of its own, lives its entire life in California ." He said that reviewing the case could allow the court "alternative grounds for sustaining application of the Act that may be more consistent with Supreme Court precedent." BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ARTICLES BY JOHN G. ROBERTS, JR. The University of Michigan Law Library (External Links, below) has compiled fulltext links to these articles and a number of briefs and arguments.
REFERENCES News articles
Government/official biographies
Other
NOTES |
|
|