Ralph Neas Quotes (67 Quotes)

One of the worst consequences politically would be for the majority of Democrats to vote for someone who, in the near future, would overturn well-established precedents on clean air, clean water, privacy, equal opportunity and religious liberty.

Obviously, there's the temptation to sit back and smile, ... But there's so much at stake, we have to do our due diligence.

He's not in a position to stand up to the right wing, especially after the last few days, ... In light of the last 48 hours, I believe he's going to go to the latter and satisfy and please the right.

John Roberts has spent the last three days trying to hide the ball from senators who are charged by the Constitution with evaluating whether to entrust him with the nation's most powerful legal job for the rest of his life,

It's an open-minded country right now. The hearings always decide what happens to the nominee, and I believe we're in store for a very spirited and robust confirmation process.

The president must not let the extreme right dictate his next choice, but instead choose a nominee who can bring us together and maintain a fair and independent balance on the Supreme Court.

We're going to make sure that Americans understand what is at stake.

We are disappointed with those Democrats and moderate Republicans who chose to support Judge Roberts despite his long record of working to undermine rights and legal protections, his evasive answers to the Senate, and the Bush administration's continued refusal to release key documents that would have illuminated his record and approach to the Constitution.

His record, his silence, and the power of the position to which he's been nominated, make John Roberts a dangerous bet one that senators shouldn't take.

This is a critically important vote, and it will be something that all progressive organizations will remember forever.

We welcome the opportunity to clarify the differences between the right wing ... and the overwhelming majority of the American people.

no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust.

We would be extraordinarily disappointed in any senator who votes for John Roberts or any other nominee who would turn back the clock on fundamental rights and liberties, ... That's the kind of vote that would never be forgotten.

The nation will be shaped for decades by decisions that are made by President Bush and the Senate about the future of the Supreme Court.

The chief justice has unique power and influence as the nation's highest-ranking judge,

A titanic clash between two competing and radically different versions of the Constitution.

It's a titanic clash between two radically different interpretations of the Constitution. . . . It's not good versus evil. It's a tremendous battle over judicial philosophy.

While we vigorously disagreed with much of his jurisprudence, we remember with respect the Chief Justice's love for the court, his success in creating comity among his colleagues, and his courage in continuing to work.

I suspect a number of progressive organizations will soon be coming out against the Roberts nomination.

He's spent his time talking about baseball, now he's playing dodgeball. I think the American people have a right to know the judicial philosophy of Judge Roberts.

It's important to have a strong progressive Democratic vote against John Roberts. If there is a vigorous opposition, that will send a signal on the next vacancy that there could be a contested nomination.

We hope that Senator Reid's colleagues will reach the same conclusion and take the same strong stand.

It's going to be a close vote, in the committee and on the floor.

This is a debate about two completely different judicial philosophies. It's not about a litmus test issue. It's not about one or two issues. It's about literally dozens of issues that are part of a judicial philosophy.

We're talking about state inheritance, we're talking about state property issues, we're talking about children's issues, we're talking about power of attorney.

Law-abiding Americans deserve to know that their government will not secretly tap their phones, read their medical records, access their library accounts or otherwise invade their personal lives, with no oversight or accountability. Law-abiding Americans also deserve to know that when law enforcement can show an impartial judge clear evidence of criminal activity or a threat to national security, swift and decisive action will be taken to protect the public. That is the balance we must achieve.

The death of chief justice Rehnquist and the president's nomination of John Roberts raises the stakes for the court and the American people exponentially.

He's very valuable to us. As much as I abhor his politics and his abusive, divisive, intolerant rhetoric, many times he reflects what many in the Republican Party are really thinking. ... He's very candid. Most of those on the right wing are not that open and candid.

Confirming John Roberts would endanger much of the progress made by the nation in civil rights over the past half century.

We are in turmoil now, domestically and internationally. This is a real test of (Bush's) leadership.

the importance of who is confirmed to succeed Chief Justice Rehnquist cannot be overstated.

It would be an invitation for George W. Bush to name someone as extreme as he wants to for the O'Connor vacancy.

tremendous mistake and a tremendous disappointment.

I'm tempted to call my friendly adversaries on the right and ask them whether we can make some joint recommendations to the Senate on document requests of the White House and the line of questioning during the hearings.

Bush has chosen to divide Americans with a nominee guaranteed to cause a bitter fight, ... record of ideological activism against privacy rights, civil rights, workers' rights and more.

There are a number of distinguished judges first appointed to the federal bench by Republican presidents who would, like Sandra Day O'Connor, likely receive overwhelming bipartisan support to replace her.

Ultraconservatives are so determined to swing the Supreme Court to the right that they pounded their own president's nominee into submission and now demand a nominee with unquestioned far-right credentials.

The events of the past week have only underscored that we need Supreme Court justices who value the role of the courts in protecting individuals' rights and freedoms, who understand the nature of discrimination and its continuing impact on our country, and who will uphold the role of the federal government in preserving those rights and acting to protect the common good.

This is the first time in 11 years that we've had a Supreme Court vacancy, the longest time since 1823.

We do not believe voters gave President Bush a mandate to turn back the clock decades on so many of our legal protections.

It appears as though President Bush wants to exploit this national tragedy to implement an ideological agenda. ... What's next, a special Social Security privatization zone

He has not demonstrated a sufficient commitment to equal justice under the law to be entrusted with upholding the Constitution and our civil rights laws.

using religion to send a signal to the right that she is going to be OK on a number of issues when she gets on the court.

Like Sandra Day O'Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a consensus nominee. Orrin Hatch told President Clinton that Ginsburg was acceptable before she was nominated. She had a long and detailed record from her time as a federal judge. In her case, there was no need for extended hearings.

Replacing two justices at the same time will have an enormous impact on the court and the lives and liberties of all Americans for decades.

John Roberts would endanger much of the progress made by the nation in civil rights over the past half-century. If John Roberts replaces Sandra Day O'Connor, the balance of the court will shift to the right for decades to come, imperiling Americans' constitutional rights and liberties.

Yesterday he talked about baseball. Today he played dodgeball.

The conventional wisdom going into the hearings for (high court nominees Clarence) Thomas and (Robert) Bork was that they were going to get confirmed. One (Thomas) was barely confirmed, and the other was resoundingly defeated.

The nomination of John Roberts has evolved considerably since July, when the White House was successful in portraying him as a lawyer above the fray.... Almost daily revelations coming out of the Reagan presidential library show someone at the epicenter of a comprehensive assault on fundamental rights that have been part of the law for decades,

Terrence Boyle is a judicial disaster. He has the worst reversal rate of all the district judges nominated by President Bush. Senators should take a careful look at Judge Boyle's record and vote to stop him from taking a powerful lifetime appointment on the appeals court.