.
May 18th, 2009
03:41 PM ET

No More Mr. Nice Guy

Program Note: Tune in tonight to hear more from Jeffrey Toobin on AC360° at 10 p.m. ET.

[cnn-photo-caption image=
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/CRIME/04/30/supreme.court.bungling.robber/art.roberts.jpg%5D

Jeffrey Toobin | Bio
CNN Senior Legal Analyst
New Yorker Columnist

When John G. Roberts, Jr., emerges from behind the red curtains and takes his place in the middle of the Supreme Court bench, he usually wears a pair of reading glasses, which he peers over to see the lawyers arguing before him. It’s an old-fashioned look for the Chief Justice of the United States, who is fifty-four, but, even with the glasses, there’s no mistaking that Roberts is the youngest person on the Court. (John Paul Stevens, the senior Associate Justice, who sits to Roberts’s right, is thirty-five years older.) Roberts’s face is unlined, his shoulders are broad and athletic, and only a few wisps of gray hair mark him as changed in any way from the judge who charmed the Senate Judiciary Committee at his confirmation hearing, in 2005.

On April 29th, the last day of arguments for the Court’s current term, the Justices heard Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder, a critical case about the future of the Voting Rights Act. Congress originally passed the law in 1965, and three years ago overwhelmingly passed its latest reauthorization, rejecting arguments that improvements in race relations had rendered the act unnecessary. Specifically, the bill, signed by President George W. Bush in 2006, kept in place Section 5 of the law, which says that certain jurisdictions, largely in the Old South, have to obtain the approval of the Justice Department before making any changes to their electoral rules, from the location of polling places to the boundaries of congressional districts. A small utility district in Texas challenged that part of the law, making the same argument that members of Congress had just discounted—that this process, known as preclearance, amounted to a form of discrimination against the citizens of the New South.

Keep Reading...


Filed under: 360° Radar • Jeffrey Toobin • Supreme Court
soundoff (4 Responses)
  1. PEACE

    OMG – NO KIDDING.

    May 18, 2009 at 9:01 pm |
  2. Annie Kate

    Seems to me that Obama needs to appoint someone to the court who has liberal leanings in their interpretation of the law. There seem to already be enough conservatives in place.

    May 18, 2009 at 8:28 pm |
  3. Terry, TX

    Mr. Toobin...what a slanted piece...and unless you have read everything...everything the Justice Roberts and the Justices have done and I doubt you have....this garbage as they say in France. Frankly I believe most Americans want these ludicrous "protections" reversed. Equal protection under the law is in the constitution....I do not believe special interests groups should be protected any longer ....all the way to hate crime...murder is murder...whatever the reason. You could have saved yourself all this typing.

    May 18, 2009 at 5:50 pm |
  4. ellen

    If Anderson is single, I think he and Jennifer Aniston may make a great couple. If he has any time for dating, that is!

    May 18, 2009 at 5:30 pm |