CNN Inside Politics - Transcript

CNN Inside Politics - Transcript
Thursday, July 21, 2005

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

CROWLEY: For more on the nomination of John Roberts for the Supreme Court, I am joined from Capitol Hill by Republican Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa. He is a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Thanks for being with us, Senator Grassley.

I wanted to note that before the president picked his nominee, you had said, well, you wouldn't be really surprised if we ended up with the kind of battles that you all had over some of those circuit court judges.

Now that you've had almost 48 hours to digest this and listen to your fellow senators, you want to change your prediction?

SEN. CHARLES GRASSLEY, (R-IA) JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Well, I think I have to.

It's much more quiet than I thought. People that you would normally think would fight this president's judges are relatively quiet, reserving judgment, probably going to hope that something will come up that will be very controversial.

CROWLEY: Well -- and speaking of that, I want to show you a couple of poll numbers that we got recently.

We asked people, Would it be all right for senators to ask Roberts his general views on abortion? Seventy-four percent of Americans said, well, that would be appropriate; 22 percent said it would be inappropriate.

So what about the question, "Generally, Judge Roberts, how do you feel about abortion?"

GRASSLEY: Well, I think to -- a very general question that doesn't go to the specifics of a case that he might have to rule on or would prejudge him so he would have to recuse himself from future cases would be OK.

But on the other hand, you know, you shouldn't expect judges to meet litmus test-type questions to determine whether or not he's going to be on the bench. We should expect to have a clear view of how he's going to approach issues. We should have -- make sure that he's got the competence to do the job, overall honesty, a good educational background.

And then I suppose for some of us, you know, is he a real strict interpreter of the Constitution and laws, or is he a little more liberal in those and maybe going -- bordering on making laws?

I think those are the things that we have a right to know and ought to know, but not how he might rule in some areas.

CROWLEY: Well, look, I think this is a little confusing to the general public. And that is, do you think it's all right to find out what the nominee's personal opinions are about abortion and how is that relevant?

GRASSLEY: You should not find out what their personal opinions are unless they were going to use those personal opinions in their judgment. Because...

CROWLEY: Well, he's going to say no to that.

GRASSLEY: But then a person shouldn't be on the bench if they're going to use their personal opinions to reach a decision.

A judge is supposed to look at the facts of a case and apply the laws to the facts, and that's -- and they have blinders on otherwise.

CROWLEY: And what about past cases on anything?

Can you ask a nominee, "Listen, this case was decided; what do you think of Roe v. Wade?"

GRASSLEY: Well, I think that that's only legitimate from the standpoint that they would see how they would use that case to apply to a future case, but only in the very general sense of that being an issue.

If they were asking how do you feel about this case as it might apply to another case, that would be entirely wrong.

CROWLEY: Senator Grassley, one of the things -- just as a closing question -- that interested me was that it's possible that some Republicans may see more harm in this nomination than others.

You have Senator Brownback who has said or indicated he seems a little worried that there are not some definitive cases that tell you about this judge, that perhaps he has been too reticent to take sides. What do you make of that?

GRASSLEY: If you look at the history of the Supreme Court, that's immaterial.

Until just recently, did we have judges that came from other courts to make up everybody on the court -- and it's only been recently.

You know, in 1950, we had three former senators on the Supreme Court. There wasn't any judgment at that time that you could be used.

And I think you ought to look at Senator Kennedy, how he observed Souter in his answering to the questions 15 years ago. Kennedy made a statement, something to the effect that Souter didn't have respect for privacy rights and he would have to vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Just see how wrong Kennedy was on Souter, and then you see why it's somewhat immaterial to draw conclusions about how somebody might rule. That's why we've got to direct our attention to a very general approach of his competence interpreting law versus making law and his educational background and his dispassionate approach to the law.

CROWLEY: Senator Charles Grassley, Republican of Iowa, member of the Judiciary Committee, thanks so much for your input.

GRASSLEY: Glad to be with you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/21/ip.01.html