AUSTIN,
Texas -- Sheesh, all I knew about John Roberts was that everyone says
he has lovely manners -- and already I was prepared to be against him.
Knee-jerk liberal? No, congratulations to the White House, Sen. John Cornyn,
Fred Thompson and everyone else involved in "managing" Roberts'
confirmation process. Can't these people do anything without being devious
about it?
My first reaction to Roberts was: "Sounds like that's about as good
as we can get. Quick, affirm him before they nominate Bork, Bolton or
Pinochet." A conservative with good manners and no known nutball
decisions or statements on his record? Hey, take him. At least he's not
(whew!) a member of the Federalist Society.
No such luck. Cornyn, who I would have sworn is not this stupid, apparently
signed off on having the nominee "forget" he was a member of
the Federalist Society, and Roberts obliged, which is strange considering
his reputation for brilliance and a spectacular memory.
Turns out the guy is listed in the society's 1997-98 "Leadership
Directory" as a member of its steering committee in Washington. How
many steering committees have you been on that you've forgotten about?
The reason that matters is that the Federalist Society is the ur-alpha-primo
ultraconservative legal group in the whole country. Since we have only
two years worth of Roberts' decisions on the bench (in itself unheard
of for nominations to the Supremes), the information about how this society
plans to steer the country can be very revealing of his positions.
So Roberts already looks disingenuous at best, and then the White House
ups and decides it's entirely too risky to let the public in on his record
as a government lawyer and refuses to release documents requested.
Excuuuuuse me, that is public record. Roberts worked for us, he was paid
by the taxpayers, this is not a matter of national security. Where does
this White House get off pulling this kind of stuff? Right away, it looks
like they're trying to cover something up. Lawyer-client privilege? Are
they nuts? Everyone's first reaction is, so what's he guilty of?
As Jay Leno notes, this is an important job -- these are the people who
pick the president. Of course we're entitled to know what the man's public
record is.
So, now all we know about John Roberts is that he has nice manners and
is being managed by a bunch of morons -- and he's willing to say what
they spin for him. Then we start getting the record. He's defended the
often violent Operation Rescue. He went to Florida to advise Jeb Bush
during the 2000 election recount. Other Federalists, Timothy Flanigan
(who's now in confirmation hearings for deputy attorney general) and Ted
Olson (who became solicitor general of the United States) signed onto
the brief to convince the Supremes to stop the count in Florida and install
Bush. It's all classic, right-wing judicial activism -- the very "activism"
they complain bitterly about if it doesn't fit their radical agenda.
Restrict the right of courts to end school segregation, slow down on enforcing
laws against discrimination, divest lower courts of jurisdiction over
school prayer cases, go easy on Title IX for women and so on. All that
was when Roberts was a junior White House lawyer and the records were
opened during the Clinton administration. The records from his time as
assistant solicitor general during Bush I are what they're trying to keep
under wraps.
The Wall Street Journal's editorial page (the People Who Don't Read Their
Own Paper) tried to describe the Federalist Society as an anodyne debating
society. No, it is not -- it is a radical right organization, which explains
why the White House made calls to national media to deny that Roberts
was a member.
Jerome Shestack, president of the American Bar Association in 1998, said,
"So much of the society's leadership consists of active politicians
and others whose slouching toward extremism is self-proclaimed."
The society is funded by millions of dollars from right-wing and libertarian
foundations. It attempts to influence legal education and works with right-wing
legal advocacy and litigation organizations.
Alfred Ross, of the Institute of Democracy Studies, explains that "through
its own 15 practice groups, the society is busy developing new legal theories
for every area of American jurisprudence, from civil rights law to national
security law, international law, securities regulations law and so on.
And if one goes through the publications of their practice groups, one
can only gasp not only at the breadth of their agenda, but the extremism
of their ideology."
The society has argued for the abolition of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, severely limiting the Environmental Protection Agency, and
rolling back gender equity laws (Title IX) and voting rights law. Its
publications have criticized teaching evolution and attacked the principle
of separation of church and state.
According to Ross, they recently launched a state judicial selection project
to try to dominate the state, as well as federal, bench. This is all standard,
ultra-right-wing claptrap. It's all about control.
If we can't shake loose the actual records on John Roberts, we certainly
should pay attention to the group he's most identified with.
