John Roberts

Jurisprudence

During Judiciary Committee hearings on his nomination to the circuit court, Roberts testified about his views on jurisprudence.http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/26jan20041230/www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/pdf/108hrg/92548.pdf

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Commerce Clause

tarting 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.

Related Topics:
McCulloch v. Maryland - John Marshall - Lopez - Law school - Interstate commerce - 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.http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/26jan20041230/www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/pdf/108hrg/92548.pdf

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Federalism

imply 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.http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/26jan20041230/www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/pdf/108hrg/92548.pdf

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Judicial activism and deference to legislatures

he 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 …t?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.http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/26jan20041230/www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/pdf/108hrg/92548.pdf

Related Topics:
Marbury v. Madison - Judicial activism

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In referring to Brown v. Board that overturned school segregation:

Related Topics:
Brown v. Board - 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 Circuit Court, he would have an obligation to follow precedents established by the Supreme Court, including the controversial decision invalidating many restrictions on the right to an abortion. He stated: "Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land… There is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent, as well as Casey." http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_senate_hearings&docid=f:92548.wais (See John Roberts Supreme Court nomination and hearings for speculation about Roberts' current views, concerns about these views raised in the hearings, and the potential impact they might have on his actions in the Supreme Court.)

Related Topics:
Circuit Court - Abortion - Roe v. Wade - Casey - John Roberts Supreme Court nomination and hearings - Supreme Court

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~