Government

Enough Politics: John Roberts Calls on Senate to Approve Obama-Nominated Judges

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is blaming both parties for the partisan gridlock on Capitol Hill that is stalling dozens of nominees from filling open judicial seats. “Each political party has found it easy to turn on a dime from decrying to defending the blocking of judicial nominations, depending on their changing political fortunes,” Roberts said in his annual State of the Judiciary report.

Roberts said that this partisan bickering has led to “acute difficulties” in “critically overworked districts.” In response, he urged federal lawmakers to come to some kind of agreement to try and avoid the problem in the future.

In December, Senate Republicans signed off on 19 of President Obama’s 38 pending judicial nominees, marking an end to months of stalemate. According to The Hill, the GOP had been blocking the votes on these supposed non-controversial nominees as “leverage to prevent votes on other more controversial judges” — an act Roberts praised.

“I am heartened that the Senate recently filled a number of district and circuit court vacancies, including one in the Eastern District of California, one of the most severely burdened districts,” he wrote. “There remains, however, an urgent need for the political branches to find a long-term solution to this recurring problem.”

Comments (62)

1 2
  • dontbotherme
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 3:00pm

    Oh no no no no no! More judges may be confirmed after the communists have been ejected from power. I want our government to be run by the constitution.

    Report Post »  
    • WhiteTeaParty
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 5:57pm

      Well said Roberts, well said.

      It’s about time, people on the right start reaching across.

      Report Post » WhiteTeaParty  
  • 1836Crockett
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 2:52pm

    You will continue to see politicians, judges and people that you are used to being “trustworthy” move to the “EVERYTHING’S ALL RIGHT – JUST GO ALONG WITH US” position. Of course they are all co-opted. Each and every one of them. When you hear this type of tripe from “the old trustworthy’s” listen to YOUR GUT. Something has an extroadinary bad smell, doesn’t it?

    Go here: http://www.savingtherepublic.com/Main.html

    Report Post »  
  • sillyfreshness
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 2:35pm

    Gridlock is good. Why let Obama ram through his cronies? I would rather have the Republicans fight tooth and nail. It will help postpone the Obama takeover even if only postpones it by a few months. I want gridlock. I don’t want an all powerful government that rubber stamps laws and takes away more rights from people by the day.

    Report Post » sillyfreshness  
  • oldchevyguy
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 1:28pm

    I believe Chief Justice Roberts should be more concerned with investigating Obamas’ birth certificate before anybody confirms his nominees.

    Report Post »  
    • sillyfreshness
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 2:39pm

      Yes, there is definitely something that is being covered up. I think what happened is Obama declared himself to be Indonesian when he was in college. That‘s why he won’t reveal his college transcripts. This is a big cover up by the leftist media. If you question it, you get this stigma that you are just another “birther.” Assign stigma names if you question anything. You’re a birther, homophobe, racist, or whatever else if you question the socialists.

      Report Post » sillyfreshness  
  • lynnissmart
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 12:58pm

    uh o: does this mean that Justice Roberts will rule to the left????

    Report Post »  
  • markamerica
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 12:09pm

    With all due respect to Chief Justice Roberts, he should sit on the bench, and worry about how the Constitution is being crapped-upon by his fellow judges. If truth be told, it would be better if the Senate obstructed the current crop of nominees until hell freezes over rather than let them further pollute the law.

    Remember how offended some members of the court were after Obama chastised them in a SOTU address over a recent ruling on McCain-Feingold? Now the Chief Justice comes out to chastise the Senate? He has his role. They have theirs. Theirs is one that is responsive to the will of the people at least to some degree. That makes it slow and political. That’s that.

    Report Post »  
  • temple62
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 12:06pm

    Term limits set to one 2 year term are needed for the Justices, Senators and Representatives. The presidents should be limited to one 4 year limit. All secret service privileges and expenses terminated when they leave office. And the only thing far-fetched about this concept is that government needs to stop the spending, here’s how!

    Report Post » temple62  
    • Chet Hempstead
      Posted on January 4, 2011 at 1:46am

      Temple62
      Last week you were complaining about Congressmen in the lame duck session ignoring the will of the people. If nobody could run for re-election, every session would be a lame duck session, and they could start ignoring everything they promised the voters from day one instead of waiting for the end of their terms.

      Report Post »  
  • wash1776
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 12:05pm

    How come it is always ‘enough politics’ when someone in power wants their own way and not before?

    Report Post »  
  • wash1776
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 11:47am

    OK Robers. How about we find a long term solution to you and the rest of the worthless people in government. We should care about what you and your cohorts want? YAH! Just like you thieving scumbags care about the people in this country!!!

    Report Post »  
  • ARIZONA VETERAN
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 11:33am

    a post Veterans Day and New Years salute to oBowMa, clinton, nappytanno, EPA naacp, seiu, la-raza, CBC and their terrorist, liberal, democrat friends, from the “enemy & hostage takers” with love
    …………………/´¯/)…………
    ……………….,/¯../………….
    ………………/…./……………
    ……../“/´¯/’—’/´¯¯`•¸……..
    ……./’/…/…./……./¨¯\……..
    ……(’(…´…´…. ¯~/’…’)……

    Report Post » ARIZONA VETERAN  
    • psst
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 12:21pm

      Blam? gotta be.
      Hussein 3 here.
      Sarge Rock is here aka Crust.

      Report Post »  
  • powhatan
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 11:21am

    congress has a 13 percent approval rating…..how can they be counted on to make any decent decisions?

    Report Post » powhatan  
  • mzmaj7
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 11:14am

    This headline is misleading. Roberts does not single out Obama’s justice appointments. Rather, he criticizes the general appointment system.

    Report Post »  
  • AFVET
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 11:02am

    Obama is burning the candle at both ends.
    Patience folks, patience.

    Report Post »  
    • wash1776
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 11:55am

      The only thing Obummer is doing by burning the candle at both ends is staying up and trying to figure out how to screw the American taxpayer more, or planning his next ridiculously expensive vacation. This is the only family in the white house that has ever demanded gourmet food for EVERYTHING they eat. This thief is so in love with himself he thinks he is entitled to the best of everything. What he is really entitled to is being tarred and feathered and shipped to Russia or China permanently.

      Report Post »  
  • SlimnRanger
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:53am

    Wow i am really surprised that John Roberts has said this,he WAS my favorite

    Report Post »  
  • heavyduty
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:51am

    To the Chief Justice John Roberts: I agree that the nominees should be appointed right after they are confirmed by Congress. I am tired of the Pres trying to shove crap down our throats. In fact I think that we should be able to question them before they are confirmed. Sorry to rain on your parade, but if the Constitution is not followed then we need to throw it out. When we do that then we can kiss this country goodbye.

    Report Post »  
  • booger71
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:49am

    Chief Justice Roberts(along with most judges) needs to learn that it is not the court’s role to “interpret” the Constitution. The Constitution stands on it’s own, and was written so to be understood by the farmer, merchant, craftsmen, and lawyer. It is odd that it is the lawyer who has the biggest problem understanding it

    Report Post » booger71  
  • Race
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:45am

    I’m with the Hillbilly. The so-called “experts” and “professionals” are what got us into this mess. Maybe it’s time for the common (sense) folk to have a say. In the meantime, gridlock is good. It keeps the morons from screwing things up more than they are.

    Report Post » Race  
  • shorthanded12
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:40am

    The three branches of government are as follows
    1. Corruption aka; Executive (*)
    2. Corruption aka; Legislative (*)
    3. Corruption aka; Judicial (*)
    To sum it up in a nut shell = “CRIME INC” The rest of us are screwed.

    PS: (*) This does include state and local levels also.

    Report Post »  
  • neverending
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:25am

    Just more of the same!! Never mind what anybody believes, what their morals are, respect for the Constitution – just get them in there!!! Roberts was one of the few I had any respect for – so much for that – and we have hopes of turning this country around???

    Report Post »  
  • psst
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:19am

    Chop-chop Hussein.You are wasting daylight here.
    Call Jesse and Al ASAP.
    Tell em Ol John Roberts wants em to go and get fitted for their Race Pimps’s Black Robes.

    Report Post »  
  • Ksera Sugarmail
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:04am

    Keegan?…..Soyotamayor?…..I say stall, stall, stall if this is the type of communist ilk that is going to be presented by B.O.

    Report Post »  
  • mark
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 9:47am

    Simple John, the current President and those in the future can just choose candidates for judgeship positions that follow the Constitution and there should be no problems with their nominations being blocked.

    Report Post »  
    • mark
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 9:57am

      No more problems, I meant to say.

      Report Post »  
    • StMichelob
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:04am

      Well, yeah, but Obama doesn’t WANT judges who “follow the constitution”. Especially now that he’s lost the House, he’s gonna need help from the Judiciary.

      Report Post » My Sacred Honor  
    • shorthanded12
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:07am

      They need to drain the swamp out thar in the 9th Circut nothing but progressives and socialist sitting on the bench. The 9th “CIRCUS” fogot the 1st words of the Constitution “WE THE PEOPLE”

      Report Post »  
  • starboard
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 9:41am

    Sorry, but the stench this administration has created the last two years will be stinking for years to come. The regulatory changes will get them there quicker but to be safe, over the long haul, they need to keep the judicial system on track with there progressive agenda.

    Report Post » starboard  
  • rappini
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 9:38am

    It’s got to be the water in DC.

    Report Post » rappini  
  • NickDeringer
    Posted on January 2, 2011 at 9:28am

    Great advice John. Now try to get the Demunists to listen to it and we’ll be doing great.

    Report Post » NickDeringer  
    • guyperram
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 9:52am

      Yes, we elected these new guys because we wanted more business as usual in Washingtongrad. They definately heard a message, unfortunately it is the one written by marx and engles.

      Report Post »  
    • Shurmus
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:00am

      Christie / Bolton 2012

      Report Post » Shurmus  
    • HillBillySam1
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:01am

      Is Chief Justice Roberts advocating that the American people simply mind their own business and leave the big decisions to the paid professionals?? The American people have no trust and no confidence in each of the three branches of government right now. The reasons: Corrupt politicians, the infusion of Progressive idealology in each branch of government, the utter contempt by our “lords and overseers” for our Constitution, and a corrupt, Progressive media that sees itself as the champion of Progressive propoganda. These judges are not elected by the people and they are appointed for life. The American people are powerless against their activism from the bench and those judges hold more power over the everyday lives of the American people than any of the elected officials in the Executive or Legislative branches of our government. So instead of lecturing how we should just “get along”, perhaps Chief Justice Roberts could help shed a light on the judges who refuse to honor their oath by upholding the Constitution of the United States of America…..just sayin’…..

      Report Post »  
    • snowleopard3200 {cat folk art}
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:10am

      We do not need another bunch of bleeding hearted, activist, and/or progressive judges seeking to impose their own values and corrupt dreams upon the nation without any control over them. This administration wants to dominate or destroy it all from top down and bottom up.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 10:49am

      The role of the American government is to secure our unalienable rights, not to “do something” just to be able to say they’ve done something. I’m perfectly fine with gridlock, if it means that there are elected officials fighting for our Constitutional rights without compromise.

      I don’t care if the government never does another thing, so long as the gridlock is due to the fight to restore and preserve our Constitutional rights. Do not compromise with these Marxists.

       
    • StMichelob
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 11:22am

      VERY well said, hillbilly. Except….you CAN impeach sitting judges….I’m just not sure how that process works or the grounds in which a judge can be impeached…lemme check my Constitution…

      Report Post » My Sacred Honor  
    • StMichelob
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 11:29am

      Well, this is off topic, but while trying to find impeachment rules on the Judiciary, I found THIS power granted to Congress…
      To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

      To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

      Something to think about (Congress) if the Cloward and Piven croud decides to get stupid…

      Report Post » My Sacred Honor  
    • NapoHill15
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 12:10pm

      This is a curious set of statements . . . . In today’s socio-political environment the gridlock the Chief Justice is speaking of should be embraced for what it really is; why it exist. It’s curious he doesn’t view it that way; that gridlock is an integral part of a cleansing and healing mechanism the founders envisioned.

      What the Chief Justice is suggesting is all too similar to what liberalism has been doing to destroy capitalism, in general; transforming it by over regulating, over intervening. What he is suggesting is a further winding down, a dismantling of a republic. In that context, it is very much a contradiction to any measure of conservatism.

      Perhaps, the Chief Justice needs to tell us more . . .

      Report Post »  
    • abc
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 12:32pm

      Nick, you must be from Mars. The problem is the REPUBLICAN filibuster in the Senate, which is what John Roberts is complaining about. The GOP members in the Senate have done more filibusters, secret holds and the like than any Senate since the racists tried to stop civil rights laws from being enacted in the 1960s. It is a travesty that the Democrats are trying to stop by changing the filibuster rules, even though it is likely that they will be hurt by these rules in two years when the Senate turns Republican (26 Democrats up for reelection then vs 10 Republicans). That you do not understand the significance of a conservative justice calling out Republican bad behavior speaks volumes. You clearly do not have the facts rights.

      Report Post »  
    • Psychosis
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 2:11pm

      @ ABC wrong……………THE DEMOCRATS fought against the civil rights movement in the 1960′s not the republicans, and for that matter, also founded the kkk

      to top it off, judges should not be appointed, they should be elected .

      p.s. did they finally fix that bridge you where hiding under? havent seen your blathering wisdom in a while

      Report Post » Psychosis  
    • StMichelob
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 2:26pm

      @PSYCHOSIS No, if judges were all elected, they would be forced to be more political in their rulings than they are now. Lobbyists would be all over them to make rulings…it would just be a bad idea. Instead, if there turns out to be a bad judge, we can always ask our ACCOUNTABLE congressional representative to look into impeachment hearings.

      Report Post » My Sacred Honor  
    • amusetec
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 3:19pm

      @StMichelob And how is that working out here in Texas they are elected and we have our fair share of activist judges but we do vote them out when we find out there rullings. But federal judges which are appointed have given us the worst rulings Ie.. William Wayne Justice which ruined Texas prison system. If you look at all the wacky rullings they have come from appointed judges that can not be removed.
      Yes as you say congress can remove them but they will never will. name judges that have been removed from the court due to there bad ruleings?
      More are removed at the ballot box than by congress.
      So your logic while is logical is not practical

      Report Post »  
    • SLEUTH
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 4:45pm

      WOW, John Roberts, i thought he was a constitutionalist. could he be more concerned about ‘work load’ than the constitution?
      i agree with most of you here, with the exception of some of these ‘progress liberals’ who prefer being a ‘globalist’ then American.
      we‘ve got to put a stop to this ’progress’ movement and return to the original intent of the constitution. the constitution is a living constitution and it can be changed by its ammendments, not by a judges ruling via his opinion.there are many documents that show what our founding fathers had in mind. there is no excues to see it any other way. we are Americans because of our constitution; if you dont believe in it, go elsewhere, there’s the door, eh border, go.

      Report Post » SLEUTH  
    • abc
      Posted on January 2, 2011 at 9:48pm

      Psychosis is clearly too psychotic to clearly read my post. No where do I say that the filibuster was used by Republicans in the 1960s to fight civil rights legislation. Those folks were indeed mostly Democrats, although I properly called them racists in my post. Those folks later became Republicans when Nixon’s so-called Southern Strategy attracted such people to switch parties. So while you are correct in historically categorizing those people as Democrats at that time, they likely vote for the GOP today. But all of that is irrelevant…

      My original point was that the REPUBLICAN senate has misused the filibuster like no minority party in 50 years. And this is why a republican Chief Justice is calling them out with such unprecedented and sharp criticism. Good for Roberts. The Senate is disfunctional when every appointment or vote requires 60 votes. It was never intended by our framers to function that way, but the originalist conservatives forget about the constitution when their beloved GOP chooses to play by rules that would make Jefferson and Madison turn in their graves. What utter hypocrites the lot of you conservatives are!!

      Report Post »  
    • racialcoward
      Posted on January 3, 2011 at 4:20pm

      ALL FEDERAL JUDGES SHOULD RUN FOR ELECTION

      Fedeeral judges want to legislate from the bench so make them run for office just like legislators. That would solve the problem of too few judges.

      Report Post »  
    • *************************
      Posted on January 3, 2011 at 4:26pm

      supreme Court Roberts calls on Senate to approve Obama judges?!?

      The Progressives (communists) are CRAWLING OUT OT THEIR WOODWORK!

      Nuke DC From Orbit … it’s the only way to be sure.
      http://nukeitfromorbit.com/

      Report Post » WeDontNeedNoStinkinBadges  
    • Republic Under God
      Posted on January 4, 2011 at 9:26am

      @ABC

      The founders intended filibusters as it was a mechanism they outlines. I am sure they didn’t imagine it would have to be used on nearly every legislative vote, but I am sure they didn’t anticipate the assault on the Constitution that has been escalating the past decade. You put the founders in the republican seats and I am confident you would have had more than filibusters on your hands.

      Please, as a progressive, don’t invoke the founders, it’s the political equivalent of an atheist invoking Christ to make a point to Christians. Stick to the likes of Alinski, Wilson, Piven and Marx.

      Report Post » Republic Under God  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love