Charles Schumer Quotes on Law & Regulation (15 Quotes)

This modification puts a stranglehold on the Brady law, it sets a 24-hour time limit for gun-show sale background checks,

has an obligation to answer tough questions from the committee about whether his views have changed and whether he would advance a particular ideological position that is contrary to decades of legal precedent.

Judge Roberts has a clear obligation to make his views known fully and completely.

Part of the president's job is to make sure his staff obeys the laws and he should make sure that anyone indicted in this dastardly outing of a covert operative is immediately dismissed from the White House,

We need to be careful here. This is a nominee who could shift the balance of the court, and thus the laws of the nation, for decades to come.

If Roberts is confirmed, it will be the first time in 75 years that the nation will have a recent legal practitioner serving as chief justice. You seem to be a lawyer above all, ... tend not to be ideologues.

I, for one, believe a judge can be pro-life yet be fair, balanced, and uphold a woman's right to choose. But for a judge to set aside his or her own personal views, the commitment to the rule of law must clearly supersede his or her personal agenda. That's a trick some can pull off, but not everyone can.

I put too much blood, sweat and tears into passing the Brady law, ... This does not sacrifice Brady... it extends Brady and it does it very, very well.

By the end, the baseball metaphors of the early hearing had given way to gambling analogies. Schumer one-upped Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), who had declared that senators were rolling the dice with you, Judge. ... This isn't just rolling the dice. It's betting the whole house.

I am not saying I will vote against John Ashcroft because he is pro-life, ... But let me say if someone was nominated for attorney general who was vehemently pro choice -- who in his or her career spent decades trying to find ways to expand the law abortion at nine months would be perfectly legal -- wouldn't you be more upset and raise more of a voice than against a nominee who was simply pro-choice.

I respect people who feel things passionately. I do. But when someone is a judge, that is not what they should bring to the bench. It is not really passion, except in rare instances, that serves the bench well. It is, rather, an ability to understand the law and follow it.

Judge Roberts should explain as soon as possible why he thought it was appropriate for him to continue hearing this case,

Senator Specter's questions aren't exactly identical to the 80-plus that I've asked of Judge Roberts, but the spirit of asking them and the need for a response is the same.

There are serious, legal and procedural questions concerning the composition of the current board, ... It's my belief that the board did not have the legal grounds to remove David Gunn.

Ideological warriors whether from the Left or the Right are bad news for the bench. They tend to make law, not interpret law. And that's not what any of us should want from our judges.