Leahy Votes
To Confirm Roberts

U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy yesterday voted in favor of the confirmation of John Roberts as the next chief justice of the U. S. Supreme Court, replacing Judge William Rehnquist, who was a part-time Vermont resident.

Sen. Leahy has a reputation of being the chief scourge of the judicial appointments of President George W. Bush, so his reaction to the appointment of Roberts has been closely watched.

The Vermont senator accompanied his "yes" vote with a long, anguished statement that chiefly touched on his reservations to the appointment of Roberts. Roberts has been praised for his intellect and his temperment, but is a far more conservative judge than Leahy would like to see on the Supreme Court.

His eventual confirmation has been seen as virtually assured, however, almost from the moment of his nomination by President Bush, because he is not seen to have a strong "ideological" streak—and because if Roberts is rejected, the President might pick someone even more objectionable to liberals.

In the end, Leahy, citing his own "conscience," voted for Roberts. Following is the conclusion of his long statement:

"Supreme Court Justices decide what cases to decide. They consciously shape the direction of the law by choosing which cases to hear as well as how they are to be decided.  We know he believes in the rule of law.

"But court decisions, especially Supreme Court decisions, are not mechanical applications of neutral principles. If they were, all judges would always reach the same results for the same reasons. They do not. Legal decisions are not mechanical. They are matters of judgment and, often, matters of justice.  As Chief Justice, John Roberts is responsible for the way in which the judicial branch administers justice for all Americans. He must know in his core that the words engraved in the Vermont marble on the Supreme Court building are not just "Under Law" but "Equal Justice under Law." It is not just the rule of law that he must serve, but the cause of justice under our great charter.

"I heard days of testimony and hours of meetings with Judge Roberts. Would I have liked more information? Of course -- I always want more.  Is a no vote the easier and more popular one?

"Of course again, especially with my constituency. But in my judgment, in my experience, but especially in my conscience I find it is better to vote yes than no. Ultimately my Vermont roots have always told me to go with my conscience and they do so today.

"Judge Roberts is a man of integrity. I can only take him at his word that he does not have an ideological agenda. For me, a vote to confirm requires faith that the words he spoke to us have meaning. I can only take him at his word that he will steer the court to serve as an appropriate check on potential abuses of presidential power. 

"I respect those who have come to different conclusions, and I readily acknowledge the unknowable at this moment, that perhaps they are right and I am wrong. Only time will tell. 

"All of us will vote this month but only later will we know if Judge Roberts proves to be the kind of Chief Justice he says he would be, if he truly will be 'his own man.' I hope and trust that he will be. "