Restoring Dignity To The Nomination Process
Restoring Dignity To The Nomination Process
September 26, 2005
Washington, D.C. - Chief Justice nominee John Roberts won the Senate Judiciary Committee's endorsement this past week with a vote of 13 to 5. The vote will now head to the full Senate for consideration next week. I believe that Roberts is a thoughtful, prudent, respectful judge who will uphold the tradition of the U.S. Constitution and American jurisprudence. He clearly disdains legislating from the bench and has spent his career supporting the constitutionally mandated separation of powers. He is the right choice for our nation's next Chief Justice, and I am confident in his ability to serve as a fair judge.
President Bush is currently identifying candidates for the next Supreme Court Justice nominee to fill retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's seat on the bench. I wrote a letter to the President recently encouraging him to consider Ohio native Judge Alice M. Batchelder as his nominee for Associate Justice. Judge Batchelder currently serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Her experience and service on the Court are exemplary. Like Roberts, she shuns judicial activism and has earned her reputation as a respectful and fair-minded judge. I believe the Supreme Court will benefit from a woman's view, and I reminded President Bush that many people believe that it would be appropriate to select a woman to replace Justice O'Connor.
The Supreme Court serves as a check on the powers of Congress and the President. There is no term limit for a Supreme Court justice, and since the average term is about 25 years, a Justice is involved in making decisions that affect all of us for many years. The power to nominate a Justice is vested in the President of the United States, and appointments are made with the advice and consent of the Senate.
As the newest member of Congress, I sincerely hope the United States Senate carries out its advise and consent role in a dignified and fair manner. It is critical at this time in history that the process be dignified and not dictated by political games.
Historically, the President's choices for Supreme Court justices are confirmed by the Senate with wide support across party lines. Such deference to the President is part of the way our system works. In the last two Supreme Court Justice nominations, President Clinton's appointees were confirmed with strong Republican support. And in 1986, Justice Antonin Scalia received a unanimous vote by the Senate.
While I believe that each member of the Senate has a responsibility to vote his or her conscious on each Supreme Court nominee, I don't believe that such a vote should ever be an opportunity for political gain.
That is why I was troubled by the Senate Minority Leader's recent comments suggesting that President Bush is not entitled to much deference in staffing the judiciary branch. Such damaging language signals a major change in the history of the Congress. The Senator's words will not only lead to a bitter and polar environment, but will also set a bad precedent for future appointments.
Let's hope the Senate can work together to preserve the integrity of the nomination process, and keep politics out of it. The American people deserve no less.
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/oh02_schmidt/nomination.html