Roberts Is The New Rehnquist

A common thread runs through the early assessments of John Roberts: Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

Roberts “spent time in his formative years with Rehnquist, for whom he clerked in 1980-1981 and with whom he remains in touch.” Individuals “familiar with Roberts” say he appears “to be a conservative consensus-builder in the mold of…Rehnquist,” and while Roberts “hasn’t had time to build a large body of opinions,” the few he has penned “leave little doubt that he is as conservative as…Rehnquist.”

The Washington Post echoes this view. Roberts is “simultaneously skeptical of federal power over the states and supportive of executive-branch power in foreign and military affairs, and his sparse judicial record resembles the conservatism of a man he once worked for at the Supreme Court, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist.”

E.J. Dionne even calls Roberts “a William Rehnquist for the 21st century.”

CNN political analyst Bill Schneider said, “if you’re looking at Roberts and saying what kind of justice do you expect him to be, he might be pretty much like Rehnquist.” [7/19/05]

And Bill Kristol said on Fox that “Picking Roberts is like picking a replacement for Rehnquist.” [7/19/05]

In terms of judicial philosophy, John Roberts is not Justice O’Connor’s replacement. He is quite clearly a preemptive replacement of Chief Justice Rehnquist.

This is important to recognize substantively, but also strategically. As it stands today, Roberts seems very likely to be confirmed. Moreover, notwithstanding Roberts’ conservatism, President Bush and conservative activists will almost certainly insist on appointing a far-right nominee when Rehnquist eventually leaves the bench. To improve our chances of appointing a more moderate nominee in Rehnquist’s position, progressives should make clear now that we consider Roberts to be Rehnquist’s replacement. Then, when Rehnquist retires, we can rightfully demand that President Bush appoint a justice in the mold of Justice O’Connor.