RateItAll: The Opinion Network

This was not quite as significant had it been for the OConner slot. Being that he replaced Rehnquist- and being a Rehnquist disciple- this really isn't going to affect the balance of the Court nor the direction of the Court much. However, if Roberts turns out to be more of a Stevens or Souter it will be very significant. And also in contrast, if he turns out to be a staunch originalist in the mold of Thomas or a Scalia that too would be significant.

This young man will affect jurisprudence and the country for many years to come. I just hope he is true to himself and the intent of the founding fathers.

It'll be interesting to see which document John Roberts decides to embrace when it comes to abortion cases (don't bother asking him; he'll dance around it like an overcaffeinated Gene Kelly). Under 28 USC 453, every justice takes an oath to "faithfully and impartially discharge" duties "under the Constitution and laws of the United States". This brings to mind 28 USC 455, which provides that a justice "SHALL disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned". In 1995, Pope John Paul II condemned abortion ex cathedra in his "Evangelium Vitae" encyclical as "an unspeakable crime" and ordained that ALL the faithful (no exceptions are made for Roman Catholic justices) must "oppose" and "vote" against it or they may have to resign. So, the question remains: will John Roberts obey 28 USC 455 and disqualify himself in abortion cases, or will he violate U.S. law and side with Catholic doctrine? Serving two masters affords one little rest, eh, Johnny? UPDATE: Well, it didn't take too long for a problem to spring up (albeit down a different road); will Roberts find the courage to dismiss himself in the upcoming Oregon assisted-suicide ruling (where his Catholicism presents an obvious impartiality)? Two weeks in, and he's already pissing off millions (what a bundle of hypocritical baggage this guy totes around)!

Even though this is A) W's first high court selection, and B) replacement of the chief justice, this story will not be as big (or perhaps more specifically, significant) than the person he selects to fill O'Conner's spot. Rehnquist, like Scalia and Thomas, was predictably conservative. Sandra Day O'Conner, however, was a swing vote in the middle. A few months ago one magazine referred to her as the Most Powerful Woman in America. I find it difficult to logically disagree with that analysis. As a result of her decisions/opinions we still have partial birth abortion and Affirmative Action. Whomever replaces her will do much more to maintain or change the legal landscape than Bush's first Supreme Court nominee.

I think this is a very big news story, but in regards to its significance, that will depend on what Roberts does during his time on the court. At age 50, he has the potential to be on the Supreme Court for a very long time. He will have a lot of influence in this country, and his confirmation will probably still be significant in the future.

Whether you like the guy or not, this is a fairly big deal. It's a lifetime appointment, so this will affect our nation for years to come. There's only been sixteen Chief Justices in the past (he makes number seventeen). Whether it's for better or worse, we have yet to see, but either way, it's a pretty big deal. (Neat little note: according to Wikipedia, the title is "Chief Justice of the United States", not "Chief Justice of the Supreme Court").

This man is very young for a Chief Justice, so he is going to be a part if our lives for years to come. He was pretty cagey during his confirmation hearings, so it's hard to tell what his agenda is, or if he even has one. I'm keeping an open mind and I'm willing to give him a chance.

If you look at the mold for what a member of the Supreme Court should be, you will see an imprint of John Roberts. He will not add words to the Constitution, or give far flung definitions to support ideology. And, the guy us pretty young. So he will be the face of the Supreme Court for many years to come, and that is a good thing.

The question regarding the Roberts confirmation was not whether or not he would become the next Chief Justice, but rather if he met that standard of conservatism the president's supporters expected. In short, the answer is no. Roberts is not an individual who, at least in his professional career, appears to let his personal views control his rulings. Thus, conservatives may find him only as a moderate who won't legalize prostitution (Kennedy might be his counterpart politically). At the end of the day, President Bush promised all Americans no litmus test and not a conservative, but a person who will not legislate from the bench who is well-qualified. Roberts will almost certainly do the constitution proud.

Probably the single most important political event of the year from the standpoint of long-lasting effect. Mag makes a good point about Hillary but nobody really believes she's a moderate. C'mon, you do not. I don't think it's accurate to characterize a few surprising no-voters (Obama and Bayh) as moderates anymore either. What is surprising is the lack of news coverage about them (FoxNews, CNN, MSNBC) and the absence of any statements of disappointment from republican senators, punctuating their defection from moderate to wing-nut status. The next nomination battle will be much less important and will most likely be derailed in and voted down by the Judicary Committee as moderate democrats will be emboldened by the lack of controversy over Obama and Bayh's wandering off the "bi-partisan" reservation. If I were Bush, I would include their names in a speech, noting how disappointed I was to see their dissent, and high-lighting how I would expect it from Boxer, Clinton, Kerry and Kennedy. It would be very handy when he nominates his next Justice to the Supreme Court. The time to identify the moral high ground is now.

It's a big deal, and what would seem to be a good choice. The fact that self-proclaimed "moderates" like Hillary voted no, says a lot however... it says she ain't a moderate, as a moderate should be doing cartwheels over this guy.

He's very young, so this story will impact America across many decades.