In which young Barack Obama opposed John Roberts’ SCOTUS nomination
By siding with the White House on health care reform, by turning a “mandate” into a “tax,” U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts may have just done more than any single individual to help Barack Obama to a second term as president.
The irony is that as a wet-behind-the-ears U.S. senator in 2005, Obama voted against confirming Roberts’ nomination by President George W. Bush to the high court. In “The Bridge,” an Obama biography, New Yorker magazine editor David Remnick says that Obama, determined to make a splash in Washington as a different kind of Democrat, gave serious thought to voting for Roberts.
But Obama was persuaded that it would hurt him, should he aspire to higher office. From Obama’s speech on the topic, via Obamaspeeches.com:
[T]he decision with respect to Judge Roberts’ nomination has not been an easy one for me to make. As some of you know, I have not only argued cases before appellate courts but for 10 years was a member of the University of Chicago Law School faculty and taught courses in constitutional law. Part of the culture of the University of Chicago Law School faculty is to maintain a sense of collegiality between those people who hold different views. What engenders respect is not the particular outcome that a legal scholar arrives at but, rather, the intellectual rigor and honesty with which he or she arrives at a decision.
Given that background, I am sorely tempted to vote for Judge Roberts based on my study of his resume, his conduct during the hearings, and a conversation I had with him yesterday afternoon.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind Judge Roberts is qualified to sit on the highest court in the land. Moreover, he seems to have the comportment and the temperament that makes for a good judge. He is humble, he is personally decent, and he appears to be respectful of different points of view. It is absolutely clear to me that Judge Roberts truly loves the law.
He couldn’t have achieved his excellent record as an advocate before the Supreme Court without that passion for the law, and it became apparent to me in our conversation that he does, in fact, deeply respect the basic precepts that go into deciding 95 percent of the cases that come before the Federal court — adherence to precedence, a certain modesty in reading statutes and constitutional text, a respect for procedural regularity, and an impartiality in presiding over the adversarial system. All of these characteristics make me want to vote for Judge Roberts….
The problem I face — a problem that has been voiced by some of my other colleagues, both those who are voting for Mr. Roberts and those who are voting against Mr. Roberts — is that while adherence to legal precedent and rules of statutory or constitutional construction will dispose of 95 percent of the cases that come before a court, so that both a Scalia and a Ginsburg will arrive at the same place most of the time on those 95 percent of the cases — what matters on the Supreme Court is those 5 percent of cases that are truly difficult….
The problem I had is that when I examined Judge Roberts’ record and history of public service, it is my personal estimation that he has far more often used his formidable skills on behalf of the strong in opposition to the weak. In his work in the White House and the Solicitor General’s Office, he seemed to have consistently sided with those who were dismissive of efforts to eradicate the remnants of racial discrimination in our political process. In these same positions, he seemed dismissive of the concerns that it is harder to make it in this world and in this economy when you are a woman rather than a man.
I want to take Judge Roberts at his word that he doesn’t like bullies and he sees the law and the Court as a means of evening the playing field between the strong and the weak.
Obama is scheduled to make some remarks on the Supreme Court decision later this afternoon. One question is whether they will include any adjustment in his opinion of Roberts.
- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
70 comments Add your comment
Aaron Burr V Mexico
June 28th, 2012
2:39 pm
….MY answer was the non answer?
Remember folks that to Republicans “Bi Partisan” means “Our way plus you help.”
@Strawman – Hate to break it to ya buddy, but we’re rationing NOW. And if you thought we LED the world in healthcare, then I wanna know what planet you’re from.
Centrist
June 28th, 2012
2:41 pm
Addendum to my post above where I said “We will be like Europe and Canada instead of leading the world in quality healthcare.”
We will continue to lead in quality healthcare for the elite ruling class, the ultra wealthy who will pay under the table, and those with “Cadillac” corporate healthcare plans willing/able to pay the penalty.
zebra
June 28th, 2012
2:45 pm
Waitaminit, it almost sounds like some of you think paying way more than anybody else for the 37th best system isn’t a good idea? Next thing you know, someone will think a for-profit health care system is a stupid idea.
You folks have to stop reading and watch more Fox News..
Redcoat
June 28th, 2012
2:47 pm
A Mexico – Auntie…………Are there any entities exempt from this law? and who might they be and when did they receive this exemption? Care to answer? Why would anyone be exempt? and is it fair? Who decides this “fairness’?
Aaron Burr V Mexico
June 28th, 2012
2:48 pm
So in other words….exactly the same as before except Republicans are sadder now?
I can has live with that for a while.
Aaron Burr V Mexico
June 28th, 2012
2:51 pm
@Redcoat – I decide this fairness. I decide that you should be taxed 300% for damage to future generations for Anthrogenic Global Warming denial.
In all seriousness, your questions start off on an entirely alien paradigm that I really don’t like wrapping my head around and really don’t have to.
Of total whim and recall, I vaguely remember certain states can receive a temporary waiver if they whine enough and aren’t red states that want to kill us all. However, since Conservatives are targeting democratic party constituencies, targeting Red States is perfectly acceptable. They made the rules, we’re all just living by them now.
yellowdog
June 28th, 2012
2:55 pm
justice roberts stayed with letter of the law on this healthcare act; sen; obama was correct in opposing him at the time of his nomination proceedings; roberts votes are usually with the dissenting majority; so, apples and oranges…….life goes on.
Kris
June 28th, 2012
3:02 pm
Like all things the repubs do, its 1/2 asses.
Speech for if the Supreme Court struck it down
Speech If the Supreme Court Voted in favor of Obamacare.
The loosing speech goes something like this ‘in sheepish voice we will do this! we will do that”. rommis was a BAD CANDIDATE YESTERDAY AND A BAD CANDIDATE TODAY AND WILL BE A BAD CANDIDATE TOMORROW.
Derail this GOP clown car .
Re elect President OBAMA 2012
Centrist
June 28th, 2012
3:25 pm
Anecdotal – no first hand experience, not there yet: I have heard that rationing of payment for services for Medicare patients who opt for supplemental (Medigap) policies to cover what Medicare doesn’t. The particular case I heard is that any supplemental policy that has the term “Advantage” means only limited doctors, hospitals, and procedures are covered.
I expect such limitations will now greatly expand.
Bernie
June 28th, 2012
3:40 pm
clyde @ 12:50 pm – My Friend that was the commentary of the FOX NEWS Talking Heads……… not America!!
By the way are you aware of the FACT, that a sizable number of wealthy SAUDI citizens are major investors and stock holders in NEWSCORP, parent company of FOXNEWS?
Are you also aware that 17 of the 19 Attackers on 911, September 11,2001 ,
are from SAUDIA ARABIA? A approximate (15%) fifteen percent investment is enough to influence any decision made or not made.
I do not know about you, but just knowing that makes ME suspect of the News reported from that particular outlet. Through Its reporting, it has caused for more disharmony between Americans than any other news outlet when it comes to political and policy issues.
To see America torn apart from the inside and while they do it to themselves with a little help from SAUDI ARABIA’s wealthy ruling class is sickening. Its bad enough that we must purchase so much of their OIL. but why is that The Republican PARTY has to rely on such an organization, so heavily connected to a Nation that despises our very existence to get their point of view to the American People?
Ryno
June 28th, 2012
4:17 pm
It’s incredibly simple. Don’t get mad, get to work.
If you’re unhappy – go out and beat them at the polls.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/112th_United_States_Congress
You need 2/3rds Majority in the House and Senate to bring a motion of repeal and (of course) the White House.
As such – we must pick up 13 Senate Seats and 36 house seats. Reapportionment has already given us a 10 seat head start in the House.
Time to get to work. SCOTUS and that the Handout Hoardes don’t know what’s about to hit them.
Larry
June 28th, 2012
4:35 pm
This is a great day for our state and nation. Too many people at some time in their lives, fall between the cracks of the health care insurance market. Your COBRA may have run out, unexpectedly, or you are just too sick, or maybe had a horrific accident to no fault of your own, and you can’t hold a job, hence insurance. This law, values all life, not just those who may currently may be gainfully employed and likely insured. Health care doesn’t have to be free, but it should be available to those who care to live, rather than die because they are temporarily out of insurance.
No surprise that a truly religious man supported this bill. His decision will save lives, starting tomorrow. God bless him.
Aaron Burr V Mexico
June 28th, 2012
4:40 pm
Ryno,
Handout hoards? What a good idea. Let’s get to work making Republicans so poor that they have to demand hand outs. The rest of us can live in a capitalist democratic society of course.
hiram
June 28th, 2012
4:58 pm
Centrist
June 28th, 2012
2:35 pm
” We will be like Europe and Canada instead of leading the world in quality healthcare.”
Center, You need to start watching a legitimate news channel, even though the real news may not live up to your expectations…
“U.S. scores dead last again in healthcare study”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/23/us-usa-healthcare-last-idUSTRE65M0SU20100623
DannyX
June 28th, 2012
5:00 pm
“As such – we must pick up 13 Senate Seats and 36 house seats.”
Good luck with that!
In fact Republicans have never met that threshold in the Senate. Republicans have never had a 60-40 filibuster proof majority in the Senate. Romney winning won’t do Republicans any good, Republicans won’t have near enough votes, so sorry.
But hey, dream on.
Btw, when are Republicans voting to repeal their socialist unfunded Medicare Part D?
BitterEXdemocrackkk
June 28th, 2012
5:12 pm
STRIVE to be SMARTER than the ORIGINAL ‘party’ of SLAVERY WANTS you to BE!
Red
June 28th, 2012
5:23 pm
I just wonder how long it will take Mitt to scrub his campaign site of all the references to Roberts being the type of judge he wants to nominate.
HELP ME, MAMA
June 29th, 2012
12:31 am
Centrist at 2:00 pm. You’re a very confused individual. One minute, you sound like Rush Limbaugh. The next, you sound like Karl Marx. Which are you? A a right-wing conservative or a left-wing socialist? (Let’s not forget that Adolf Hitler was a right-wing scoialist.)
HELP ME, MAMA
June 29th, 2012
12:40 am
My goodness! All this Republican chatter that the Supreme Court’s ruling today will result in “the largest tax increase in the nation’s history.” What a bunch of bull$#!+ ! The only people who will get “taxed” are those who will be “fined” by the IRS for not having health insurance. Big deal. These are the same folks who can’t or won’t get health uinsurance and run to a hospital; emergency room for routine medical care. We’re paying for them right now. I’ll be so glad to hear Romney explain during the debates he’s going to have with Obama why he worked hard for mandates in the Massachusettes health care system he created, but doesn’t like them under the federal system. It’s going to be fun to listen to him lie through his teeth and stumble all over himself.
HELP ME, MAMA
June 29th, 2012
12:50 am
Contrary to the propaganda artists for the right wing, America does not lead the world in quality health care. According to ther CIA World Factbook, America ranks 29th out of 237 countries in the world in terms of health care “outcomes,” i.e., the measure of how patients come out after being treated. On the other hand, America ranks 3rd among these 237 countries in terms of the most expensive health care. Here’s a suggestion: either increase the quality of health care to what we’re paying, or reduce the cost to match the lower quality of care actually being given..