People For The American Way...email about Roberts. The man is SCARY!!

[in_cog_ni_to]

No More Smooth Sailing – Roberts' Nomination Has Hit Stormy Waters!
Tell Your Senators to Demand Full Disclosure from the White House.




While senators are home over recess, tell them to demand full cooperation from the White House!




In the month senators will spend with their constituents before they begin their formal review of Roberts' nomination, PFAW and our state coalition partners will be holding a series of events to show the deep grassroots support for a fair and independent judiciary.

Find out what's going on in your state!http://www.SaveTheCourt.org/Calendar



******:

Tens of thousands of you have already sent a message to the Senate: Accept nothing less than full cooperation from the White House and John Roberts! While they're home during the August recess, your Senators need to hear us demand that they stand tall and do their constitutional duty.

Petition your senators now!

Each day brings more troubling news about Roberts’ approach to our constitutional and civil rights--and more evidence that the White House can’t be allowed to keep important parts of Roberts’ record secret. Based on what we already know, Roberts has a lot of explaining to do.

When Roberts worked for the Reagan Justice Department, for example, he derided what he termed the “so-called” right to privacy and said that it is “not to be found in the Constitution.” The Washington Post reported yesterday that Roberts, referring to the Supreme Court’s landmark privacy ruling in Griswold v. Connecticut, praised a dissent that would have permitted states to prosecute people for using contraceptives--even married couples!


But this is only the tip of the iceberg. Here are some highlights from what the press uncovered over the last week. While working under Republican presidents, John Roberts:

supported regulatory changes that would have permitted the federal funding of discrimination against women, minorities, people with disabilities, and older Americans (Washington Post, July 26 );
argued that Congress should strip the Supreme Court of authority to rule on cases regarding abortion, school prayer, and certain school desegregation remedies (New York Times, July 28 );
argued that affirmative action programs were bound to fail because they required "the recruiting of inadequately prepared candidates" (New York Times, July 28 );
criticized the Supreme Court decision forbidding organized prayer in public schools;
sought to expand the ability of prosecutors and police to question suspects out of the presence of their attorneys (Washington Post, July 26 );
and argued that the Justice Department should not intervene on behalf of female prisoners who were discriminated against in a job-training program (New York Times, July 28 );
…and this information comes from documents the White House willingly made available!

John Roberts is up for one of the most critical jobs in our democracy. Given emerging reports like the ones above, the Senate must conduct a comprehensive review process--and that includes demanding full cooperation from the White House and answers from nominee Roberts.

Don't forget: even some Senators who support Roberts will stand up for other Senators' right to ask questions – especially if they know the public expects it.

Whether your senators are Republican or Democrat, they need to know that their public is on the side of full disclosure. It's the American Way.

Tell them with our petition right now. If you have already signed, get your friends on board!
http://Petition.SaveTheCourt.org

– Your Allies at People For the American Way



Sign the petition:
http://Petition.SaveTheCourt.org
This petition allows you to track the signatures you help gather! When you sign this petition and forward it on to friends, you'll be able to watch your own impact grow throughout the nation as each of your friends sends it on to their friends - and those friends send it on again. Watch your own tidal wave of citizen activism roll across the land.

Donate to fund our work:
http://www.SaveTheCourt.org/support

[norml]

1. Thanks for the info.

I'll have to get back to this.

[greekspeak]

2. I got this today

If this ugly, despotic, maniacal, unamerican blather is only the GOOD stuff ShrubCo is willing to dole out, can you even FATHOM how heinous is the stuff they are holding back? I shudder to think. :scared:

[Goldeneye]

3. Where does this come from?

'argued that Congress should strip the Supreme Court of authority to rule on cases regarding abortion, school prayer, and certain school desegregation remedies (New York Times, July 28 );'

Constitutional scholars can you give me any idea where they think they are coming from with stuff like this?

[FreedomAngel82]

4. He is scary

I was just reading about this. :scared: Persecution for the right to privacy?! Even a married couple?! This guy truly is a mad-man.

[in_cog_ni_to]

5. Be SURE to sign the Petition!

:hi:

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. From "People For The American Way" website. Roberts at a glance.

:scared:

Roberts at a Glance
John Roberts has been a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for only two years and was a corporate law firm lawyer for most of his career. He has a sparse public record, making it difficult to evaluate his fitness for the Supreme Court. Where he does have a record, however, Roberts fails to show a commitment to fundamental civil and constitutional rights, both in his role as a Deputy Solicitor General and judge.


School Desegregation
Roberts argued that Congress could pass a law preventing all federal courts from ordering busing to achieve school desegregation under any circumstances, a position even more extreme that that advanced by Theodore Olson and adopted by the Reagan Administration.

Access to Justice
Roberts argued that Congress should strip the Supreme Court of the authority to rule on cases regarding school prayer, abortion, busing for school desegregation, and other issues, a position even more extreme that that advanced by Theodore Olson and adopted by the Reagan Administration.

Affirmative Action
Roberts argued that affirmative action programs were bound to fail because they required "the recruiting of inadequately prepared candidates."

Voting Rights
Roberts helped promote the Reagan administration's efforts to severely limit the circumstances under which minorities could bring suit under the Voting Rights Act.

Immigrants' Rights
Roberts criticized a Supreme Court ruling striking down a Texas law that had allowed school districts to exclude children of undocumented immigrants.

Civil Liberties
In a recently-decided case brought by a Guantanamo Bay prisoner, Judge Roberts joined a ruling holding that the government could try terrorism suspects without granting them basic due process protections.

Religious Liberty
Roberts argued against clear First Amendment protections for religious liberty and in favor of officially sponsored school prayer at graduation ceremonies before the Supreme Court, which rejected his argument.

Title IX
Roberts argued to narrow the reach of Title IX, the law that prohibits sex discrimination in education programs that receive federal funding.

Sex Discrimination
Roberts argued that the Justice Department should not intervene on behalf of female prisoners who were discriminated against in a job-training program, contradicting even the views of extremely conservative Civil Rights Division head, William Bradford Reynolds.

Rights of the Disabled
Roberts criticized as "judicial activism" a court's order requiring a sign-language interpreter for a hearing-impaired public school student.

Rights of the Accused
Roberts sought to expand the ability of prosecutors and police to question suspects out of the presence of their attorneys.

Reproductive Freedom
Roberts urged the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade, the landmark decision granting women the right to choose.

Environmental Protection
As a judge, Roberts authored a dissent arguing that the Endangered Species Act may be unconstitutional as applied in that case. Worse, this case indicated that he may subscribe to the very dangerous new "federalist" views of limited congressional power to protect the environment and the rights of individual Americans

Executive Power
As a judge, Roberts has shown enormous deference to the executive and an expansive view of executive power. In one case, for example, he would have gone farther than his colleagues on the court and allowed the Bush Administration retroactively to eliminate the jurisdiction of the federal courts to hear claims against Iraq by American soldiers who had been tortured there as POWs during the Gulf War, at a time when Iraq was considered a terrorist state.

Excessive Arrest Procedures
Roberts ruled against a 12 year-old girl who was handcuffed, arrested and taken away by police for eating a single French fry on the D.C. Metro, even though an adult would only have gotten a paper citation in that situation

http://www.savethecourt.org/site/c.mwK0JbNTJrF/b.901293/k.7F49/Where_Does_Roberts_Stand.htm