The Roberts Hearings
Byline: THE WASHINGTON TIMES
The ridiculous scrutiny Judge John G. Roberts Jr. is enduring in order to determine whether he should be confirmed to serve on the Supreme Court exemplifies once again the absurd lengths to which the more liberal element within Congress will go to undermine the form of government our Founding Fathers worked so hard to establish ("Democrats hit Roberts' ambiguity," Page 1, Friday). What is at stake here is the integrity of the nomination process, which, unfortunately, has been reduced to a type of political campaign in which the candidate, Judge Roberts, is expected to divulge his personal views on abortion, homosexuality and other issues.
Two key issues should be the exclusive focus of the hearings: What is Judge Roberts' understanding of the function of the Supreme Court in relation to the other two branches of government, and second, how will he handle the Constitution? Questions regarding a person's views on public-policy issues such as abortion and homosexuality are appropriate within the context of a political campaign because candidates for political office will be expected to legislate. However, Judge Roberts is not running for political office, and to treat him as if he were by demanding that he divulge his personal views on moral and social issues is an unfortunate abuse of the nomination process.
It appears the liberals, who have used the Supreme Court as a second legislative branch of government, are desperate to make sure the sword doesn't cut both ways. Hopefully Judge Roberts will be confirmed and then work hard to restore the Supreme Court to its original purpose.
Dixon, Calif. …