[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16558-16559]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             SUPREME COURT NOMINATION OF JOHN ROBERTS, JR.

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, today in the Senate we will undertake one 
of our most significant and historic constitutional responsibilities. 
The eyes of all Americans and of history will be focused upon us. The 
American people, through their votes, have entrusted us with the 
constitutional responsibility to provide advice and consent on Supreme 
Court nominations. They have entrusted us to govern as their elected 
representatives. We must ask ourselves: How will the American people 
view us--how will history judge us--for the deliberations we begin 
today?
  It is my goal the American people will say, and history will record, 
that we were fair and thorough, that we treated our Supreme Court 
nominee, Judge Roberts, with dignity and respect, and that we worked 
expeditiously to confirm Judge Roberts before the Supreme Court began 
its new term in October.
  Leading up to his announcement last night, the President engaged in a 
selection and a consultation process that can be characterized with a 
few words: ``bipartisan,'' ``inclusive,'' and ``unprecedented.''
  The President and his White House reached out to both Republicans and 
Democrats. He listened thoughtfully to our views and he thoughtfully 
welcomed our suggestions on potential nominees and on the nominations 
process. In all, the White House contacted more than 70 Senators, 
including more than two-thirds of the Democratic Caucus and, of course, 
every single member of the Judiciary Committee.
  The President was not required by the Constitution to reach out or 
consult. He was not required to take any time at all. He could have 
rushed through his choice. He could have nominated someone on the same 
day Justice O'Connor announced her retirement without consulting 
anyone, but he did not. The President sought input because he believed 
it was the right thing to do. I commend him for this inclusive 
approach, which I believe has strengthened the overall integrity of 
this process.
  Now we move to the next stage. Last night the President announced the 
nomination of Judge John Roberts, Jr., to be an Associate Justice of 
the Supreme Court.
  Most Americans are getting their very first glimpse of the nominee. 
What do we know about him? Born in Buffalo, NY, in 1955, Judge Roberts 
was raised in Indiana with his three sisters. He ventured off to 
Massachusetts for college at Harvard and graduated summa cum laude with 
a bachelor's degree in, as we have heard, only 3 years. During the 
summers, he worked at a steel mill to help pay for college.
  But his academic journey did not stop here. He then enrolled in 
Harvard Law School, where he once again excelled. He earned the coveted 
position of editor of one of the most well-respected law journals in 
the country, the Harvard Law Review.
  After graduating from law school with high honors, Judge Roberts 
served as a law clerk to Judge Henry Friendly on the Second Circuit, 
and then to William Rehnquist, who was then an Associate Justice on the 
Supreme Court.
  In 1981, he continued his legal career at the Department of Justice 
as the Special Assistant to the U.S. Attorney General, and then as 
Associate Counsel to President Reagan.
  In 1986, Judge Roberts entered private practice, joining the law firm 
of Hogan & Hartson, where he specialized in civil litigation. Three 
years later, he returned to public service as the Principal Deputy 
Solicitor General of the United States.
  During his legal career, he has argued an impressive 39 cases before 
the Supreme Court--39 cases. To put that in perspective, only a few of 
the 180,000 members of the Supreme Court bar have ever argued a single 
case before the high Court.
  In January 2003, President Bush nominated Judge Roberts to serve on 
the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, often referred to as the second 
highest court in the land.
  Upon his nomination to the appellate court, more than 150 members of 
the

[[Page 16559]]

DC Bar--including both Republicans and Democrats--expressed support for 
Judge Roberts. In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, they 
wrote that Judge Roberts is ``one of the very best and most highly 
respected appellate lawyers in the nation, with a deserved reputation 
as a brilliant writer and oral advocate.''
  Judge Roberts' nomination was well received by the Judiciary 
Committee and was favorably reported out of the committee by an 
overwhelming, bipartisan vote of 16 to 3, and on May 8, 2003, he was 
unanimously confirmed by the Senate.
  I believe Judge Roberts is exactly the kind of Justice America 
expects on the Supreme Court. He is among the best of the best legal 
minds in America. He is a mainstream conservative, someone who 
understands that the role of a judge is to interpret the law and the 
Constitution and not to legislate from the bench.
  He is someone who will be fair, openminded, and impartial--not 
someone who will prejudge cases, predetermine outcomes, or advance a 
personal political agenda.
  In short, he is a Supreme Court nominee who will make America proud. 
Throughout his life, Judge Roberts has worn many hats: a devoted 
husband and father of two, a skilled litigator, and a superb jurist. I 
am confident Judge Roberts will be an asset to the Supreme Court and 
that he will serve with honor and distinction, just as he has on the DC 
Circuit Court.
  As we look ahead, I do encourage my colleagues to remain focused on 
our three goals: first, conducting a fair and thorough confirmation 
process; second, treating Judge Roberts with dignity and respect; and, 
third, having an up-or-down vote on Judge Roberts before the Supreme 
Court starts its new term on October 3.
  These goals are reasonable. These goals are achievable. There are 75 
days from today until October 3. It took an average of 62 days from 
nomination to confirmation for all the current Supreme Court Justices. 
It only took an average of 58 days to confirm President Clinton's 
nominees, Justices Breyer and Ginsburg. And even though some Senators 
held different philosophical views from these Justices--in many cases 
vastly different philosophical views--they both received up-or-down 
votes and were confirmed by wide margins. These nominations serve as 
useful models for us today.
  Ultimately, I hope this process is marked by cooperation, and not 
confrontation, and by steady progress, not delay and obstruction.
  This morning, less than 12 hours after the President's announcement, 
some extreme special interest groups already are mobilizing to oppose 
Judge Roberts. They are not even giving him the courtesy of reserving 
judgment until the Judiciary Committee hearings. Together, as Senators, 
we can rise above the partisan rhetoric and obstruction that has 
gripped the judicial nominations process in the past.
  A thorough investigation and debate on Judge Roberts does not require 
delay or personal attacks or obstruction. A fair and dignified process 
is in the best interests of the Senate, the Supreme Court, the 
Constitution, and the American people.
  I look forward to welcoming Judge Roberts to the Senate a bit later 
today. I urge my colleagues to join me in congratulating him on his 
nomination to the Supreme Court.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________