Sam Cummings for Chief Justice (9/18/05)
by Dean Hartwell
Judge John Roberts told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he viewed judges as umpires in a baseball game. They call balls and strikes for parties that come before them.
The confirmation “game” that Roberts is playing for Chief Justice of the United States will soon be over. The Senators have asked a number of questions about legal issues and Roberts, for the most part, has not lifted the bat off his shoulders.
If Republicans believe that a judge of Roberts’ stature has the best qualifications to be Chief Justice, they should think again. I happen to know someone who is better qualified.
I suggest Judge Sam Cummings for Chief Justice of the United States.
Who is Sam Cummings?
Aside from being my first cousin, once-removed, he serves as a United States District Court judge in Lubbock, Texas. His background compares favorably to that of Judge Roberts.
Roberts has served two years at the United States Appellate Court level. By contrast, Cummings has served eighteen years as a district judge.
Judge Roberts engaged in a conflict of interest while serving as a judge. In Hamden v. Rumsfeld, the case revolved around whether the government had to follow the Geneva Convention (which guarantees basic human rights) with al Qaeda detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Named in the case were several Bush Administration officials.
During the hearing of this case, Roberts met with many of the same Administration officials who interviewed him for the Supreme Court. Roberts wound up casting the deciding vote and said that the government did not have to follow the Geneva Convention for the detainees.
The federal courts have rules on the conduct of federal judges. The judges must recuse themselves when their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Roberts’ failure to recuse himself has been cited by some critics as a mistake.
Cummings, on the other hand, has not been known to fail to recuse himself in similar circumstances.
In terms of controversial cases, Roberts once ruled that an arrest of a minor for eating one French fry on a Metro train was justified. Had the minor, a twelve year-old girl, been an adult, she would have received a ticket. [1]
Cummings has taken on tough cases with distinction. In Emerson v. United States, he looked at a case where a man was indicted for possessing a weapon while under a restraining order against his estranged wife. Cummings threw out the indictment as violative of the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. He favored an interpretation of the Second Amendment that gives the right to own weapons to individuals rather than just the National Guard. I disagree with his interpretation but concede that his decision won support from gun owners groups across the nation. [2]
Backers excuse Roberts' lack of judicial experience by mentioning that he brought several cases before the Supreme Court. But just as baseball players lack umpiring skills, so, too, do lawyers lack experience as judges.
The United States Senate will be the umpire here. They should acknowledge the fact that there are hundreds of Sam Cummingses with ample experience on benches across the nation. Then they should demand that President Bush select one of them for Chief Justice. The new candidate will then have the experience necessary to do well for our nation.
Endnotes:
[1]
www.villagevoice.com/news/0537,hentoff,67717,6.html