Chief Justice John Roberts?

Mon Sep 5 10:17:22 PDT 2005

I had the honor of clerking for RBG on the DC Circuit.  She would make a
fine chief.
	Her interpersonal style is complex.  She is extraordinarily
sensitive to collegiality with both equals and subordinates. She is a
reserved, hard working person (an incredible work-acholic) who schedules
friendly time with her subordinates to make sure she does not over look
their needs.  Her husband is the family maker of light conversation. 

Malla Pollack
Professor, American Justice School of Law
Visiting Univ. of Idaho, College of Law
mpollack at uidaho.edu
208-885-2017

-----Original Message-----
From: conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Earl Maltz
Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 3:14 PM
To: Paul Horwitz
Cc: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Chief Justice John Roberts?

I'm not speaking from personal knowledge, but someone told me that she 
lacks interpersonal skills.

At 02:55 PM 9/4/2005 -0700, Paul Horwitz wrote:
>
>Why do you say Ginsburg is "apparently completely unsuited temperamentally 
>for the job" of Chief?  I don't ask in a hostile way, and I have no stake 
>in the answer; I am just curious why you say so.  Of course, such a 
>nomination would be implausible in any event.
>
>Paul Horwitz
>Southwestern University School of Law
>Los Angeles, CA
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Earl Maltz
>Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 2:51 PM
>To: Greg Magarian
>Cc: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>Subject: Re: Chief Justice John Roberts?
>
>Obviously, this situation presents the President with interesting tactical
>decisions.  Since I don't think that the question of who holds the title of
>"chief" is particularly important, I would:
>
>1.  Elevate Kennedy to the Chief Justice simultaneously giving him the
>Warren Burger award for complete mediocrity.  (Actually, Ruth Bader
>Ginsburg is my first choice for both, but she is apparently completely
>unsuited temperamentally for the job).  After getting plaudits for making a
>nod to moderates.
>
>2. Follow by appointing Janice Rogers to Kennedy's seat.  After the
>Democrats had exhausted themselves by going ballistic and filibustering her
>to death, I would follow with Edith Jones if it looked like I could get
>away with it, Edith Clement if I couldn't.  Nice symbolism--a justice from
>New Orleans.
>
>At 05:33 PM 9/4/2005 -0400, Greg Magarian wrote:
> >Wow -- careful consideration of a nominee for Chief Justice as "an
> >obstruction of justice."  A characterization in the proud tradition of
> >dissent as terrorism and the 2000 election as democracy.
> >
> >Professor Noble does make an interesting point about the strategic
> >dimension of the present situation.  The presence of two simultaneous
> >vacancies gives Democrats and moderates a political opening for
> >demanding that one of the new Justices, presumably the new associate, be
> >a moderate in the spirit of Justice O'Connor (whatever they, we, or
> >anybody take that to mean in substance).  Given the country's
> >ideological divide and the President's political troubles, the Dems have
> >a realistic chance to sell such a scenario, which obviously would be a
> >steal for them, as a prudent and reasonable compromise.  Of course, to
> >get that result, they would need the political moxie to pull off the
> >appeal, so Professor Noble can probably rest easy.
> >
> >Gregory P Magarian
> >Professor of Law
> >Villanova University School of Law
> >299 N. Spring Mill Road
> >Villanova, PA 19085
> >(610) 519-7652
> >
> > >>> JFN <jfnbl at earthlink.com> 9/4/2005 4:29:46 PM >>>
> >At 2:06 PM -0500 9/4/05, Frank Cross wrote:
> > >I foresee timing problems with immediately nominating Roberts for
> > >Chief.  The Dems will demand a delay in the hearings, I'm sure.
> >
> >On what grounds? We need to take a closer look? Now we're REALLY
> >going to go through his record with a fine-toothed comb? And that's
> >up against starting the term with a full court and foreclosing 4-4
> >splits. It would almost look like an obstruction of justice.
> >
> > >Is there any reason why not to go forward with the Roberts
> > >nomination for associate and then, in December, nominate another
> > >judge for Rehnquist's seat, and renominate Roberts for elevation to
> > >Chief?
> >
> >Second choice. Re-confirmation of Roberts before he has a chance to
> >give Democrats any ammunition is almost a given. The drawback is that
> >it gives McCain and the Gang of 14 the Solomon Option: cut the baby
> >in half. Give the President his CJ (magnanimously) and reject
> >Roberts' replacement (what are we -- potted plants?). The Gang of 14
> >is all about the Solomon Option. Owens and Pryor get a vote; Myers
> >and Saad don't. If you were looking for an "extraordinary
> >circumstance" to justify a filibuster, you could hardly do better
> >than two simultaneous appointments to the highest court.
> >
> >John Noble
> >_______________________________________________
> >To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> >To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> >http://listsucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
> >
> >Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> >private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> >posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly
> >or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
> >_______________________________________________
> >To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
> >To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> >http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
> >
> >Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> >private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> >posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly
or
> >wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
>_______________________________________________
>To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
>http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof
>
>Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as 
>private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are 
>posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or 
>wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
>
>
>----------
>Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conlawprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
wrongly) forward the messages to others.