Re: Clinton put Starr as the issue to avoid the issue of lying under oath

Decisions by Roberts below, i read them all, to me he's left of
center, in other words left of conservatives he's not far-right AT ALL

-----

On January 17, 2006, Roberts dissented along with Antonin Scalia and
Clarence Thomas in Gonzales v. Oregon, which held that the Controlled
Substances Act does not allow the United States Attorney General to
prohibit physicians from prescribing drugs for the assisted suicide of
the terminally ill as permitted by an Oregon law. The point of
contention in this case was largely one of statutory interpretation,
not federalism.

On March 6, 2006, Roberts wrote the unanimous decision in Rumsfeld v.
Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights that colleges accepting
federal money must allow military recruiters on campus, despite
university objections to the Clinton administration-initiated "don't
ask, don't tell" policy.

[edit]Fourth Amendment
Roberts wrote his first dissent in Georgia v. Randolph (2006). The
majority's decision prohibited police from searching a home if both
occupants are present but one objected and the other consented.
Roberts criticized the majority opinion as inconsistent with prior
case law and for partly basing its reasoning on its perception of
social custom. He said the social expectations test was flawed because
the Fourth Amendment protects a legitimate expectation of privacy, not
social expectations.[31]

[edit]Notice and opportunity to be heard
Although Roberts has often sided with Scalia and Thomas, Roberts
provided a crucial vote against their position in Jones v. Flowers. In
Jones, Roberts sided with liberal justices of the court in ruling
that, before a home is seized and sold in a tax-forfeiture sale, due
diligence must be demonstrated and proper notification needs to be
sent to the owners. Dissenting were Anthony Kennedy along with Antonin
Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Samuel Alito did not participate, while
Roberts's opinion was joined by David Souter, Stephen Breyer, John
Paul Stevens, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

[edit]Abortion
On the Supreme Court, Roberts has indicated he supports some abortion
restrictions. In Gonzales v. Carhart (2007), the only significant
abortion case the court has decided since Roberts joined, he voted
with the majority to uphold the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth
Abortion Ban Act. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for a five-justice
majority, distinguished Stenberg v. Carhart, and concluded that the
court's previous decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey did not
prevent Congress from banning the procedure. The decision left the
door open for future as-applied challenges, and did not address the
broader question of whether Congress had the authority to pass the
law.[32] Justice Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion,
contending that the Court's prior decisions in Roe v. Wade and Casey
should be reversed; Roberts declined to join that opinion.

[edit]Equal protection clause
Roberts opposes the use of race in assigning students to particular
schools, including for purposes such as maintaining integrated
schools.[33] He sees such plans as discrimination in violation of the
constitution's equal protection clause and Brown v. Board of
Education.[33][34] In Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle
School District No. 1, the court considered two voluntarily adopted
school district plans that relied on race to determine which schools
certain children may attend. The court had held in Brown that "racial
discrimination in public education is unconstitutional,"[35] and
later, that "racial classifications, imposed by whatever federal,
state, or local governmental actor, ... are constitutional only if
they are narrowly tailored measures that further compelling
governmental interests,"[36] and that this "[n]arrow tailoring ...
require[s] serious, good faith consideration of workable race-neutral
alternatives."[37] Roberts cited these cases in writing for the
Parents Involved majority, concluding that the school districts had
"failed to show that they considered methods other than explicit
racial classifications to achieve their stated goals."[38] In a
section of the opinion joined by four other Justices, Roberts added
that "[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop
discriminating on the basis of race."

[edit]Free speech
Roberts authored the 2007 student free speech case Morse v. Frederick,
ruling that a student in a public school-sponsored activity does not
have the right to advocate drug use on the basis that the right to
free speech does not invariably prevent the exercise of school
discipline.[39]

On April 20, 2010, in United States v. Stevens, the Supreme Court
struck down an animal cruelty law. Roberts, writing for an 8-1
majority, found that a federal statute criminalizing the commercial
production, sale, or possession of depictions of cruelty to animals,
was an unconstitutional abridgment of the First Amendment right to
freedom of speech. The Court held that the statute was substantially
overbroad; for example, it could allow prosecutions for selling photos
of out-of-season hunting.[40]

On 5/28/12, jgg1000a <jgg1000@hotmail.com> wrote:
> When Obama is described as right of Center, even then Roberts is NOT
> Far Right...
>
> On May 28, 2:19 pm, lynn...@aol.com wrote:
>> Roberts is an issue. His far right viewpoint leaves us cold. L
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jgg1000a <jgg1...@hotmail.com>
>> To: Open Debate Political Forum IMHO <opendebateforum@googlegroups.com>
>> Sent: Wed, May 23, 2012 8:20 am
>> Subject: Clinton put Starr as the issue to avoid the issue of lying under
>> oath
>>
>> Now Obama is seeking to make Roberts the issue rather than the
>> onstitutionality of Obamacare... If it fails, SCOTUS is wrong, If
>> COTUS says it is Constitutional then Roberts is a Hero... Assuming
>> bamacare is Constitutional regardless of what SCOTUS says a lot about
>> he Left's thinking and diversity of opinion --- "we are right not
>> atter what"... How sad how Progressiveism has become so narrow-
>> inded and statist...
>> --
>> ou received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Open
>> ebate Political Forum IMHO" group.
>> o post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
>> o unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>> or more options, visit this group
>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
> To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en