CNN Lou Dobbs Tonight - Transcript
CNN Lou Dobbs Tonight - Transcript
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
DOBBS: My next guest is one of three Democrats who voted against Judge John Roberts during his nomination to the federal appellate court. That 16-3 vote came, of course, before the Senate Judiciary Committee two years ago.
Senator Dick Durbin joins us now from Capitol Hill. Senator, good to have you here.
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL) JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: Good to be with you.
DOBBS: This nomination is receiving considerable applause from all quarters, also we're starting to her hear some discussion from -- actually the left and the right that he may not be the perfect candidate. What is your view? And do you expect to vote against him again?
DURBIN: Oh, I'm not going to make that decision until after the hearing. And as far as I'm concerned, we start with a clean slate. I want to give Judge John Roberts an opportunity to come before us and answer the questions.
We can concede the obvious, he's legally skilled, a very bright man. He has no questions, related to his honesty or ethics that I'm aware of. And a good temperament. So it really comes down to the fundamentals of the hearing where we will ask questions to try to understand his basic views of the issues that he'll face on the bench. And he may be on the bench for 20 to 30 years. So they're important questions.
DOBBS: Why did you vote against him?
DURBIN: He was evasive. He wouldn't answer the questions. We asked him the most basic things. On the question of Roe V Wade, where he'd said he wanted to overturn the decision, he said, I only put that in a brief because that's what my client wanted. I was an advocate for my client. So I said, well, what is your position on Roe V Wade? Well, it's the settled law of the Supreme Court. And I said, well where do you stand? Well as long as it's a settled law, that's where I stand. That is an evasive answer for the Circuit Court. It's totally unacceptable for the Supreme Court. I think it's important for us to understand whether he's in the mainstream of American values when it comes to privacy, the rights of privacy and women's rights.
DOBBS: Admittedly, there's maybe influence by fund raising. But MoveOn.org has launched a national campaign saying, Roberts has been associated with some of the most fringe and extreme views for the Republican party for years. You just described him in quite different terms. Do you think perhaps MoveOn.org is a little bit over its skis on this one?
DURBIN: Well you can count on groups from both sides to dramatize the most telling elements of a person's background in order to appeal to their base. But notwithstanding that, I think our obligation on the judiciary committee, both Democrats and Republicans, is really get down to basic questions of his values. Where does he stand on workers rights? Where does he stand on civil rights? What will he say about the right of privacy that was behind so many important Supreme Court decisions?
DOBBS: And Let me ask you, Senator, on the shield law, in hearings before the committee today, your judgment, should journalists as they have in dozens of states, have federal shield law protection for their confidential sources?
DURBIN: There's a reason why freedom of the press is enshrined in our Bill of Rights. It's critical to America, and it's critical to having a check on the power of government, to find a way to ferret out corruption. But what do you do in this circumstance? The situation involving Valerie Plame, where the very disclosure of information is in fact breaking the law. Where it wasn't done for a national public interest, but done for a selfish political mendacious reason. And what do you say when the traditional privilege between attorney and client says it doesn't apply to the commission of a crime in this law, when it comes to reporters says, oh no, only if the crime relates to national security. There's some big questions to be answered here.
DOBBS: And I know you're doing so and amongst those questions, of course, why "New York Times" reporter Judy Miller is in jail and a two-year investigation, longer than that of Watergate, is still not concluded into the White House CIA leak. Senator Durbin, thanks for being here.
DURBIN: Thanks, Lou.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/20/ldt.01.html