CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports - Transcript
CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports - Transcript
Friday, July 1, 2005
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
KING: For a Democratic per on the battle that could lie ahead, we're joined by Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York. Senator Schumer, thank you for joining us today.
You, of course, will have a key perch here as a member of the Judiciary Committee. Let me ask you this question on this day, with Justice O'Connor stepping down, name for me one or two conservatives with whom you might disagree on the issues but who you could support if the president were to send their name up.
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, (D) NEW YORK: Well, I'm not going to name judges today. I don't think that's appropriate.
I will say this, I've supported a whole lot of conservatives. So have most Democrats that the president has nominated. And in fact, the ideal justice would be someone just like Justice O'Connor, a mainstream conservative, someone who's thoughtful and someone who is pragmatic.
KING: One name viewed as a bit of a wildcard would be the attorney general, Alberto Gonzalez, a close friend of this president.
SCHUMER: We're not going to get into names today. I don't think that's a very good idea.
I have one test, just one. No litmus test on any specific issue. Will the nominee interpret the law, not make the law? Judges have enormous power. They are not elected. And any judge who thinks that they know better than years of law and jurisprudence shouldn't be on the bench whether they're far left or far right.
KING: Well, you say senator no litmus test. Many of the interest groups on your side of the debate are rushing out statements today saying they view Roe v Wade potentially at risk here with the president's next nominee, could tip the ideological balance of the court.
When you say no litmus test, does that mean that you believe it would be inappropriate for yourself or any Democrat to ask the president's nominee how he or she stands on the issue of Roe v Wade.
SCHUMER: Oh, no. It is appropriate. In fact, it's our obligation to ask them. But you have to ask them a lot of questions. There are judges on the bench right now, for all I know, Sandra Day O'Connor who don't personally support the right to choose, but believe it's part of American jurisprudence.
So it's appropriate to ask these questions. In fact, I think I originated the idea that these questions are appropriate a few years ago. And now they are.
But that doesn't mean you have any single litmus test. You want to get a whole picture of the man or the woman and see are they someone who's going to follow jurisprudence, interpret the law, not make law.
KING: Put into context for us, senator, what you believe to be the distinction. Many expected it would be the chief justice, Mr. Rehnquist, who would step aside. It is a swing vote, instead: Justice O'Connor. How does that make the battle ahead different?
SCHUMER: Well, that's the toughest -- Justice O'Connor's position is the toughest one to fill, because she was right in the middle at four to the left, four to the right. She was the fulcrum at the center of the court, and therefore, everyone, everyone on every issue is going to look and focus on who the new nominee would be and how they compare to Justice O'Connor.
When it's somebody who's a little more cut and dried, if you will, in terms of their views, whether it's Justice Rehnquist or somebody more on the liberal side, it's a little less focused and a little less controversial. This is the toughest test for us, and after all, we haven't had a nominee to the Supreme Court in over ten years.
KING: The toughest test you say. Do you expect, as many do, a battle royale here? Or are you one of the contrarians who think the president will pick somebody relatively in the centrist and there won't be a big fight after all?
SCHUMER: Well, the president is at the rubicon right now. And I think this will affect his entire presidency. If he is going to play to his hard right base and pick somebody who is way out of the mainstream, I think it will create a fight in all likelihood. But it will also (INAUDIBLE) to the president's detriment.
The people -- American people, want us all to come together. And the kinds of fights that have been there in the past, they don't like very much. We have -- I've asked the president for a summit. I authored a letter that every Democrat except Robert Byrd signed, and he wrote his own that said the same thing, saying please consult with us.
You know, when President Clinton consulted with Orrin Hatch and said what about this one, what about that one, Hatch said yes on this, no on that, it allowed him to have his two nominees sail through the court.
If the president starts consulting in a real and earnest, private way with us, that will auger well. If on the other hand, he you know, just sort of puts down the name of a nominee and says take it or leave it and that nominee is out of the mainstream, that will auger poorly not just for this nomination, but for future nominations and for the future of the country over the next several years.
So this is a seminal moment that is before us.
KING: Senator Charles Schumer of New York, a seminal moment as you describe it. I think those on both sides of this fight would agree with that statement. Sir, thank you for your time today.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/01/wbr.01.html