On the recordApril 6, 2016
I am here to defend Chief Justice John Roberts. I am here because he has been attacked, without cause, by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Yesterday afternoon the senior Senator from Iowa hit a new low in trying to justify his unprecedented obstruction of President Obama's Supreme Court nomination of Judge Merrick Garland. The chairman of the Judiciary Committee accused Chief Justice John Roberts of being ``part of the problem'' when it comes to the politicization of the Supreme Court. That is without any foundation. I don't agree with the Chief Justice on every opinion he has rendered, nor, frankly, do I agree with any of the other seven on opinions they have rendered. We have had some disagreements on a number of opinions they have authored and participated in. Again, I don't agree with the Chief Justice on many of the opinions he has written, but his observations about the Supreme Court confirmation process have obviously struck a nerve in the Republican caucus. Here is what happened. Days before the unfortunate death of Justice Scalia, before anyone could have anticipated the Supreme Court vacancy, Chief Justice Roberts made the commonsense assertion in a speech he gave that partisan politics hurt our Nation's highest Court. This is what he said: When you have a sharply political, divisive hearing process, it increases the danger that whoever comes out of it will be viewed in these terms. . . .…





