• Exceptional legal ability;
• Extensive experience and knowledge in law;
• Outstanding intellectual and analytical talents;
• Maturity of judgment;
• Unquestionable integrity and independence;
• A temperament reflecting a willingness to search for a fair resolution of each case before the Court;
• A sympathetic understanding of the Court's role under the Constitution in the protection of the personal rights of individuals;
• An appreciation for the historic role of the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of the meaning of the U.S. Constitution, including a sensitivity to the respective powers and reciprocal responsibilities of the Congress and Executive.

The Guidelines do not provide for gradation of ratings; qualified and unqualified are the only ratings employed.

In reaching this conclusion, a subcommittee of the Executive Committee read extensive materials, including: all of Judge Roberts’ written opinions as a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and many articles, briefs and memoranda written by him while he served as Special Assistant to Attorney General Smith, as Associate White House Counsel, as Principal Deputy Solicitor General and as a private practitioner at Hogan & Hartson. Judge Roberts did not respond to a request to be interviewed. However, the subcommittee conducted a number of telephone interviews of former colleagues and attorneys who had appeared before him, and received and considered comments from the membership of the New York City Bar Association.

As of the issuance of this statement, new information about Judge Roberts becomes available on a daily basis. The New York City Bar Association may choose to reconsider its rating of Judge Roberts if information material to his qualifications emerges. For example, there are current press questions as to whether or not Judge Roberts should have disclosed his meetings with Bush Administration officials regarding his potential Supreme Court nomination while he was considering cases in which the United States of America was a party, including for instance, the matter of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. (The New York City Bar Association submitted an Amicus brief on behalf of Hamdan.)

Given the information available to date, the Executive Committee did not believe it appropriate to take this matter into consideration at this time. However, we ask the U.S. Senate, in fulfillment of its proper constitutional role in the confirmation process, to make a thorough and thoughtful inquiry of Judge Roberts on this issue, as well as any other that could shed light on his qualifications, character and suitability to serve as a Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

About the Association
The Association of the Bar of the City of New York (www.nycbar.org) was founded in 1870, and since then has been dedicated to maintaining the high ethical standards of the profession, promoting reform of the law, and providing service to the profession and the public.

back to top