Moments before the Senate confirmed John Roberts as the next
chief justice of the United States in a 78-22 vote on Thursday,
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said the court
“will embark upon a new era in its history, the Roberts
era.”
But just what that era will be like is still unknown.
As a former member of the Reagan administration, Roberts is
openly right-leaning, and some expect he will follow closely in the
footsteps of his predecessor, William Rehnquist.
But, as with all justices, experts say his votes on some issues
may come as a surprise to observers.
As chief justice, Roberts will head a court that will likely be
faced with a number of controversial issues in the coming years,
such as same-sex marriage, privacy and abortion.
Roberts’ answers during the Senate hearings indicated some
actions he may take as chief justice.
In particular, “he offered support for the right of
privacy,” said Gary Rowe, a UCLA law professor.
With the growing attention toward privacy, Rowe said this was an
answer that went a long way toward easing some of the concerns many
Democratic senators had about appointing Roberts as chief justice
to the Supreme Court.
On these and other issues, some expect Roberts to take a more
literal reading of the U.S. Constitution.
“John Roberts has indicated that he will interpret the
Constitution in a very strict manner, not allowing for those sort
of more broad … interpretations of the Constitution,” said
Gabe Rose, events director for Bruin Democrats.
Rose used the example of same-sex marriage, which has recently
become a critical subject of public discussion.
In Rose’s opinion, there is some constitutional protection
for same-sex marriage, though it is clearly not specifically
referenced in the Constitution.
But Rose said that, based on Roberts’ past statements, he
does not expect the chief justice to approach his reading of the
Constitution in such a way that would allow for same-sex
marriage.
“It’s very likely he could rule against things like
civil rights for same-sex couples,” Rose said.
In analyzing Roberts’ role on the Supreme Court and how he
will vote on the important issues, many experts look to
Rehnquist’s legacy for pointers.
Given that both Roberts and his predecessor are considered
conservative, his appointment will not precipitate a substantial
change in the politics of the court, said UCLA law Professor Daniel
Lowenstein.
“Roberts is replacing someone who is quite conservative
… so it doesn’t change the direction of the court,”
he said.
But Kenneth Karst, professor emeritus at the UCLA School of Law,
warned against making assumptions about Roberts’ votes based
on his political views and against drawing too close a comparison
between the new chief justice and his predecessor.
“I don’t think he’ll just be a clone for Chief
Justice Rehnquist,” Karst said.
“He may be more sympathetic than the chief justice was to
some kinds of causes that are dear to liberals, but he may be more
conservative.”
And Karst said making predictions about how a Supreme Court
justice will rule is always a tricky task, because justices have
often demonstrated unpredictable voting patterns in the past.
“Anyone who makes any pronouncements here is going way out
on a limb,” he said.
The more controversial appointment will come when President Bush
nominates a replacement for Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who
resigned from her seat in July.
O’Connor was often a swing vote for major decisions, so
the appointment of her replacement has the potential to cause a
drastic shift in the court, Lowenstein said.