[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 21037-21038]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       NOMINATION OF JOHN ROBERTS

  Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, with the Judiciary Committee's 
confirmation hearings all but complete, I rise today to announce my 
vote on the nomination of Judge John Roberts to serve as the 17th Chief 
Justice and the 116th Justice of the United States Supreme Court.
  I have come to my decision not in haste, but with great care and 
consideration. Over the history of our Nation, relatively few Senators 
have had the opportunity to consider the nomination of a Chief Justice 
and I recognize the honor that accompanies this great responsibility.
  Judge Roberts is an extremely well qualified nominee. Some have said 
he may be the best nominee ever to the Supreme Court. I am not one that 
regularly calls on such hyperbole on most issues, but I can say today 
that from what I have seen, I expect Judge Roberts to serve with 
distinction and honor as Chief Justice. I think the Court will be 
enhanced despite the obvious and measurable impact of the loss to the 
Court of Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
  My record on judicial nominations speaks for itself. I have supported 
213 of the 214 district and circuit court judges confirmed by the 
Senate. I voted against filibustering judicial nominees twenty-four 
times. I understand the executive branch's power to appoint judges--as 
Nebraska's Governor I appointed the entire State Supreme Court and 
Court of Appeals and more than half the State's sitting judges.
  As a Senator who pledged to put aside the partisan games to get 
things done in Washington, I was very concerned last year about how a 
potential Senate shutdown due to a stalemate over judicial nominations 
would impact legislation important to the Nation, and especially my 
home State of Nebraska.
  We needed a national energy policy--including the renewable fuels 
standard that would boost ethanol production, a very strong Nebraska 
industry. We needed to complete the Highway bill--with $1.3 billion in 
road construction funds that will create jobs and boost the economy in 
Nebraska. We needed to avoid the now annual ``omnibus'' spending bill 
that made it nearly impossible to monitor and control Washington 
spending. Social Security and Medicare need to be addressed. At the 
time I was concerned about the ongoing drought--``Drought David'' as I 
called it to bring attention to it--that is ravaging our agricultural 
sector in Nebraska and across the Nation. We had no idea the wrath and 
destruction that Hurricane season would bring to bear on the Nation, 
but after Katrina we can see how important it is to have a functioning 
Congress.
  Senator Alexander, during a floor speech regarding the judicial 
stalemate offered a suggestion, a call really, that many of us heard 
and decided to heed. Surely, a bipartisan group of Senators could 
develop an agreement that would resolve the stalled judicial 
nominations and diffuse the nuclear option--and ultimately, ease some 
of the partisan tension that had crippled the Senate and threatened to 
shut it down completely.
  I am very proud of my role in the so-called ``gang of fourteen,'' the 
bipartisan group that navigated the path to confirmation for many of 
the President's judicial nominees and preserved the precedents and 
traditions of the Senate. I am also very proud that the gang's 
``memorandum of understanding'' paved the way to complete many of the 
legislative priorities I mentioned earlier--including the energy bill 
and the highway bill.
  The ``memorandum of understanding'' included an important section 
asking the President to improve communications with the Senate on 
judicial nominees. We asked that he spend more time on the advice part 
of the ``advice and consent'' clause in the Constitution.
  When Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor announced her planned 
retirement in June, the White House heeded our recommendation and 
consulted with a vast majority of Senators before nominating Judge 
Roberts to the Court. That consultation with the Senate certainly 
diffused some of the more extreme partisanship when the Roberts 
nomination was announced. Not all of it, of course, but some of it.
  Before the Judiciary Committee began its process, I met personally 
with Judge Roberts. In that meeting he impressed me. We talked at 
length about judicial activism and the threat it poses to the Nation. 
We talked about settled law. His knowledge of the history of law was 
impressive. His belief in and dedication to the rule of law was 
apparent and admirable.

[[Page 21038]]

  At the outset of the Roberts confirmation process, I said that I 
hoped the gang of fourteen had no role in the process because that 
would mean the process was working. And it did work.
  The Roberts confirmation hearings were dignified, the questions were 
tough but appropriate, and the answers Judge Roberts provided were as 
most expected. The hearings were no place to overturn law or discuss 
case specifics. The hearings did not produce any disqualifying 
revelations, nor did I expect that to happen.
  Only time will tell where Judge Roberts will come down on the 
prevailing legal matters that come before the Roberts Court. I can only 
take him at his word that he will approach his role on the Court 
without a predetermined agenda, without activism, and with only the 
intention to balance the scales of justice for all Americans.
  What came though to me as I watched his confirmation hearings was a 
man with great poise, a deep and thorough knowledge of the law, a love 
for this country and unmatched integrity. John Roberts is a man 
deserving of the nomination and deserving of confirmation.
  I will vote to confirm Judge John Roberts as Chief Justice of the 
Supreme Court.

                          ____________________