Friday, September 16, 2005
Judge Roberts Gets ABA's Highest Rating
"The ABA Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary found John Roberts "well-qualified," its highest rating, in his nomination to be chief justice of the United States
Thursday, July 21, 2005
About Judge John G. Roberts
from the D.C. Circuit's web site:
Judge Roberts was confirmed by the Senate to a judgeship on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on May 8, 2003, and sworn in on June 2 by Chief Justice Rehnquist. Judge Roberts graduated from Harvard College in 1976, and received his law degree in 1979 from Harvard Law School. Following graduation from law school, he served as law clerk for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the following year to then-Associate Justice Rehnquist of the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge Roberts served as Special Assistant to United States Attorney General William French Smith from 1981 to 1982 and Associate Counsel to President Ronald Reagan from 1982 to 1986. He then joined Hogan & Hartson where he developed a civil litigation practice, with an emphasis on appellate matters. From 1989 to 1993 he served as Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States. He returned to Hogan & Hartson in 1993. At the time of his confirmation, Judge Roberts was the senior partner in charge of Hogan & Hartson's appellate practice. He is a member of the American Law Institute
Judge Roberts was confirmed by the Senate to a judgeship on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on May 8, 2003, and sworn in on June 2 by Chief Justice Rehnquist. Judge Roberts graduated from Harvard College in 1976, and received his law degree in 1979 from Harvard Law School. Following graduation from law school, he served as law clerk for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and the following year to then-Associate Justice Rehnquist of the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge Roberts served as Special Assistant to United States Attorney General William French Smith from 1981 to 1982 and Associate Counsel to President Ronald Reagan from 1982 to 1986. He then joined Hogan & Hartson where he developed a civil litigation practice, with an emphasis on appellate matters. From 1989 to 1993 he served as Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United States. He returned to Hogan & Hartson in 1993. At the time of his confirmation, Judge Roberts was the senior partner in charge of Hogan & Hartson's appellate practice. He is a member of the American Law Institute
Opinions of Judge Roberts: 2003
BDPCS, Inc. v. F.C.C., 351 F.3d 1177 (D.C. Cir. 2003), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200312/00-1369a.pdf.
I.T. Consultants, Inc. v. Pakistan, 351 F.3d 1184 (D.C. Cir. 2003), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200312/03-7016a.pdf.
Sioux Valley Rural Television, Inc. v. F.C.C., 349 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. 2003), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200311/02-1208a.pdf.
Bloch v. Powell, 348 F.3d 1060 (D.C. Cir. 2003), available at
Consumer Elecs. Ass'n v. F.C.C., 347 F.3d 291 (D.C. Cir. 2003), available at
U.S. v. Bolla, 346 F.3d 1148 (D.C. Cir. 2003), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200310/02-3085a.pdf.
Ramaprakash v. F.A.A., 346 F.3d 1121 (D.C. Cir. 2003), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200310/02-1283a.pdf.
Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton, 334 F.3d 1158 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (dissenting), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200307/01-5373b.pdf.Opinions of Judge Roberts: 2004
Hedgepeth ex rel. Hedgepeth v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth., 386 F.3d 1148 (D.C. Cir. 2004), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200410/03-7149a.pdf.
U.S. v. Tucker, 386 F.3d 273 (D.C. Cir. 2004), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200410/03-3139a.pdf.
U.S. v. Holmes, 385 F.3d 786 (D.C. Cir. 2004), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200410/03-3026a.pdf.
U.S. ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp., 380 F.3d 488(D.C. Cir. 2004), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200408/03-7128a.pdf.
In re England, 375 F.3d 1169 (D.C. Cir. 2004), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/03-5329a.pdf.
U.S. v. Smith, 374 F.3d 1240 (D.C. Cir. 2004), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/03-3087a.pdf.
Midwest ISO Transmission Owners v. F.E.R.C., 373 F.3d 1361, (D.C. Cir. 2004), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/02-1121a.pdf.
Williams Gas Processing - Gulf Coast Co., L.P. v. F.E.R.C., 373 F.3d 1335, (D.C. Cir. 2004),available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/03-1179a.pdf.
Nat’l Council of Resistance of Iran v. Dep’t of State, 373 F.3d 152 (D.C. Cir. 2004), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200407/01-1480a.pdf.
Opinions of Judge Roberts: 2005
These aren't active links--sorry!
U.S. v. Lawson, 410 F.3d 735 (D.C. Cir. 2005), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200506/04-3067a.pdf.
U.S. v. Lawson, 410 F.3d 735 (D.C. Cir. 2005), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200506/04-3067a.pdf.
Amoco Prod. Co. v. Watson, 410 F.3d 722 (D.C. Cir. 2005), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200506/04-5006a.pdf.
Outlaw v. AirTech Air Conditioning & Heating, Inc., available at
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200506/04-7059a.pdf.
AFL-CIO v. Chao, 409 F.3d 377 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (concurring in part and dissenting in part), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200505/04-5057a.pdf.
Nat’l Treasury Employees Union v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 404 F.3d 454 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (concurring), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200504/04-1157a.pdf.
Universal City Studios LLLP v. Peters, 402 F.3d 1238 (D.C. Cir. 2005), available at
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200504/04-5138a.pdf.
Pub. Serv. Comm’n Ky. v. F.E.R.C., 397 F.3d 1004 (D.C. Cir. 2005), available at
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200502/03-1092b.pdf.
U.S. v. Toms, 396 F.3d 427(D.C. Cir. 2005), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200502/02-3082a.pdf
Taucher v. Brown-Hruska, 396 F.3d 1168 (D.C. Cir. 2005), available at
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200501/04-5026a.pdf.
AT&T Corp v. F.C.C., 394 F.3d 933 (D.C. Cir. 2005), available at
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200501/03-1431a.pdf.
Koszola v. F.D.I.C., 393 F.3d 1294 (D.C. Cir. 2005), available at http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200501/03-5313a.pdf.
Education Station
Hello, blogworld! Recently I posted elsewhere about the need for us all to be informed citizens and to educate ourselves on issues before forming opinions. Specifically, I was referring to the recent nomination by President Bush of Judge John Roberts for the open spot on the Supreme Court. I said that we shouldn't let the media or our personal convictions filter this down into a one-issue confirmation hearing, and we should educate ourselves about Judge Roberts before we decided that he was either a brilliant choice or another judge sure to send this country to hell in a handbasket. To help you out in educating yourself, I created this blog wherein I will link to court opinions written by Judge Roberts. Read them yourself and then decide.
A word of advice on reading the decisions: do not base your opinion of Judge Roberts on whether or not you think the result was fair. The important thing is to look at how he reached the decision--did he apply the law, did he apply the correct standard of review, is he consistent from one case to another. That will tell you what kind of decisions you can expect from him should he be confirmed. Don't condemn him OR support him, for example, just because you don't think it's fair (or because you do think it's fair) that the defendant's car was searched, or that the evidence of his prior uncharged criminal act was admitted in his trial--if that's the law, and Judge Roberts applied it correctly, then he's doing his job.
A word of advice on reading the decisions: do not base your opinion of Judge Roberts on whether or not you think the result was fair. The important thing is to look at how he reached the decision--did he apply the law, did he apply the correct standard of review, is he consistent from one case to another. That will tell you what kind of decisions you can expect from him should he be confirmed. Don't condemn him OR support him, for example, just because you don't think it's fair (or because you do think it's fair) that the defendant's car was searched, or that the evidence of his prior uncharged criminal act was admitted in his trial--if that's the law, and Judge Roberts applied it correctly, then he's doing his job.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)