New Judge, New Chief JusticeI'm a little disturbed that President Bush has nominated John Roberts to be the new Chief Justice, replacing William Rehnquist. I personally don't have anything against Roberts so far, but it seems a bit odd to me to put him at the lead of a court composed of judges that have been there for decades in some cases.
It's like being on a baseball team and having the rookie come in and be the team captain. The current judges have worked long and hard on this court, and for them to be passed up for this type of "promotion" seems a little weird, especially since Roberts seemingly has little or no experience in what goes on behind the scenes in the Supreme Court. Honestly, he's only been a judge at all for 2 years at the appellate level. I feel like this is going to be the case, of the "new boss" coming in and having to take instructions from the people that are already there. Why wouldn't Bush nominate someone already there? There are a couple of Conservatives left to choose from, you know.
The Washington Post reports that the Democrats will be harder on Roberts now. I kind of expected that. But in this case I think they are justified seeing as how Roberts is being named Chief with not too much experience to go along with it. Does anyone care to say why he should get the spot over some of the current justices with the experience to go along with their resumes?