John Roberts:
Uncompassionate Conservative
By Marjorie
Cohn
Tuesday 06 September 2005
George
W. Bush has nominated John Roberts to be Chief
Justice of the United States. Bush lauded Roberts for his "goodwill and decency
toward others." Yet Roberts' record reveals a callous disregard for the rights of
people very much like the
tens of thousands who have died
and been rendered homeless by Katrina.
The outpouring of compassion by
people all over this country - and indeed, the world
- in the wake of Hurricane Katrina
stands in stark contrast to
Bush's actions both before and
after the tragedy. In spite of warnings about
the weak levees in New Orleans, Bush cut the Army
Corps of Engineers' budget for levee construction by 44 percent. By sending
the National Guard to fight in his trumped-up war on Iraq,
Bush deprived the people of New Orleans
of critical assistance immediately after the hurricane
struck. The day after what
may be the
worst disaster ever to hit the United States, Bush refused to interrupt his golf
game to exercise badly needed leadership.
Most of the
tragic images flashing across our television screens are of African Americans. They are suffering indescribable hardship as a result of an
administration that failed to protect them from the
predicted hurricane, and then failed
to timely render aid that would have
saved thousands of lives.
John
Roberts' career has established his credentials as an uncompassionate conservative. He has worked consistently
to deny access
to the courts to individuals who have suffered harm
like those in New Orleans. He has
long been an enemy of
civil rights - for the poor, for minorities, for women, for the disabled, for workers, and for a clean
and safe environment.
Roberts tried to cut back the
federal law that allows people to sue the government when they have
been deprived of their federal rights. When he
worked at the Solicitor General's
office in the George Bush I
administration, Roberts wrote an amicus
brief in which he argued that
the state of Virginia should not reimburse hospitals
for Medicaid claims at reasonable rates. Roberts said
the Medicaid Act did not
create any enforceable rights. Roberts would likely
deny relief to people in New Orleans who seek to recover
medical costs from a government that failed to protect them.
Roberts viewed legislation to fortify the Fair Housing
Act as "government intrusion."
Roberts condemned a Supreme Court decision
striking down a Texas law that allowed
schools to deny admission to the children of undocumented
workers.
Roberts fought for a narrow interpretation of the Voting
Rights Act that would have
made it much harder for minorities to get elected to public office.
He mischaracterized the Act as requiring
"a quota system for electoral
politics." Robert's characterization of the Voting Rights
Act borders on racism.
Roberts contended that Congress could
pass a law to prevent all federal courts from ordering
busing to achieve school desegregation, a position much more extreme than that adopted
by the Reagan administration. Roberts would likely have
agreed with his boss William Rehnquist, who argued to his boss
Justice Robert Jackson that the
racist Plessy v. Ferguson's separate but equal doctrine
should be maintained.
Roberts took the
position that affirmative action programs are bound to fail because they
require recruiting "inadequately prepared
candidates," another unfounded
and racist stance.
Roberts has referred
to the "so-called 'right to privacy'" in the Constitution; he argued that
Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided
and should be overruled. Roberts'
position would consign poor women
who could not afford to travel
to a state that does allow abortion to coat hangers in back alleys. Roberts
would likely vote to uphold state laws
that made the sale of
contraceptives illegal, which the Court
struck down in Griswold v. Connecticut.
Roberts worked to keep women who
have suffered gender discrimination out of court.
He argued for a narrow interpretation
of Title IX that would effectively
eviscerate its protections altogether. Roberts wrote an
amicus brief in which he argued
that a student who was sexually
molested by her high school
teacher was not entitled to compensatory damages under Title IX. Fortunately, the Supreme Court held
otherwise, saying that the girl would
have "no remedy at all" if
it had adopted Roberts' position.
Roberts ridiculed the gender pay
equity theory of equal pay
for comparable work as a
"radical redistributive concept."
He mocked female Republican members of Congress
who supported comparable worth, writing, "Their slogan might as well be
'from each according to his ability, to each according to her gender.'"
Roberts supported a dramatic weakening of the Education
for All Handicapped Children Act. He
maintained that a deaf student who
got by in school by lip-reading
and using a hearing aid was
not entitled under the Act
to receive the services of a sign-language
interpreter in the classroom.
Roberts defended Toyota for firing a woman with carpal tunnel
syndrome.
Roberts argued on behalf of
the National Mining Association that West Virginia citizens could not prevent mining
companies from extracting coal by blasting the
tops off
of mountains and depositing the debris in nearby
valleys and streams.
Throughout his career, John Roberts has acted without
"goodwill and decency toward others." His positions have demonstrated a mean spirit that flies
in the face of what we like
to think America stands
for. The 50-year-old Roberts would have
the opportunity to shape the nation's highest
court for the next two or
three decades. A Roberts Court would
threaten the rights of all
but the rich
and powerful. It is time
for the Democrats to utter the "f" word: Filibuster.
Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, President-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists.