UPDATED: Useful Questions III
by TChris
Earlier posts (here and here) have suggested questions that could usefully be posed to John Roberts at his confirmation hearing. Continuing in that vein, Vikram David Amar suggests that senators ask Roberts to analyze the Supreme Court's rulings in five "blockbuster" cases that were decided by 5-4 majorities.
Amar refutes the notion that a judicial nominee shouldn't be asked about legal issues if those issues might again come before the court:
This is nonsense. Of course the nominee should not make, or be asked to make, promises about future rulings. But the disclosure of specific views about past cases does not commit the judge to rule in any particular way in the future. He remains free to change his mind if he is persuaded by sound legal arguments, the same way sitting justices are free to do so.
< Beware Congressional Immunity for Rove and Others | Froomkin OnLine Chat at WaPo > |