The Supreme Court is at balance

It's important that we select a Republican as President in '08.  The Supreme Court is in the balance.  Here is what the Dems think and will do if Hilary is elected.

Schumer: Supreme Court 'Dangerously Out of Balance'
By Evan Moore
CNSNews.com Correspondent
July 31, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - The U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts is "the most conservative in memory," and the Senate should not confirm another nominee to the bench from President Bush "except in extraordinary circumstances," in the view of Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

Addressing the fifth annual American Constitution Society convention Friday, Schumer said the Senate had been misled by the "charm of nominee Roberts and the erudition of nominee [Samuel] Alito."

"Our fears were more than justified from the ultra-conservative record of [those] two men," said Schumer, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Schumer's comments coincided with a new ABC News-Washington Post poll in which 31 percent of respondents said the Supreme Court was "too conservative" in its jurisprudential decision-making, an increase from 19 percent in a similar poll in 2005.

Schumer citing a remark by Justice Stephen Breyer - who was appointed by President Clinton in 1994 - said, "It is not often in the law that so few have so quickly changed so much."

"In case after case, our most recently confirmed justices have appeared to jettison decisions recently authored by their immediate predecessors," the New York Democrat said.

"The decisions this term were especially cruel, advancing the traditional conservative preferences for the government over criminal defendants and the interests of business over consumers and employees," he said.

Schumer said Senate confirmation hearings and commitments made during them "are often meaningless."

"Hearings produce a lot of sound and fury, often signifying nothing. It is too easy to evade a question. It is too easy to refuse to answer. It is too easy to be coached, and it is too easy to offer an easy platitude rather than a concrete opinion," he said.

Schumer urged the Senate to focus on a nominee's record and previous opinions.

"Senators have an obligation to scrutinize the character and philosophies of judicial nominees, and nominees have an obligation to cooperate," he said. "This is especially when a nominee's ideology, judicial philosophy and constitutional views are central considerations in the president's decision to nominate."

Schumer's concern is rooted in a widespread belief among court watchers that a member of the Supreme Court's liberal bloc will be the next to retire.

Justice John Paul Stevens is 87 years old and has served on the bench since 1975. Although Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is more than a decade younger, her frail frame and a previous battle with cancer has prompted suspicion that she is in poor health. Justice David Souter is also rumored to be seeking retirement.

On Monday, Roberts was hospitalized after taking a fall at his summer home in Maine. At 52, Roberts is the youngest justice on the bench. His predecessor, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, was absent for much of the 2004-2005 term, while be battled thyroid cancer.

Court-watchers respond

Ed Whelan, president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, on Monday sharply criticized Schumer for his speech.

"Schumer is adept at bluster, and he is shrewdly trying to shape the environment in case a vacancy arises," he told Cybercast News Service.

Whelan said the Roberts and Alito confirmation hearings had been productive, contrary to Schumer's assertions.

"We learned quite a bit, during Roberts' and Alito's testimony, about the quality and integrity of their Senate attackers, including Schumer ... after harshly criticizing, and voting against, both the Roberts and Alito nominations, Schumer can hardly pretend to be disappointed by their performance," he said.

"There is no inconsistency at all between their testimony and their performance [on the bench]," Whelan added.

Whelan characterized the court's rulings this term as rather modest - "a small step towards the right, and towards the center."

"After decades of liberal judicial activism on so many issues, the court's position remains decidedly on the left," he asserted.

"Thus, even if the Roberts Court were to take big strides to the right in future terms - a prospect that would require further improvements to the court's composition and rather more boldness than the new justices have so far shown - it would still merely be moving towards the center," Whelan added.

Jan Crawford Greenburg, an ABC News legal analyst, opined on her blog that while the Supreme Court had tacked to the right in this term, "some of the liberal commentary on the court since the justices packed up and left town has been almost breathtaking in its over-the-top hysteria."