JOHN GLOVER ROBERTS JR. (born January 27, 1955) is the 17th and current Chief Justice of the United States . He took his seat on September 29, 2005, having been nominated by President George W. Bush after the death of chief justice William Rehnquist . He has been described as having a conservative judicial philosophy in his jurisprudence .
Roberts grew up in northwest
In 2003, Roberts was appointed as a judge of the D.C. Circuit by George W. Bush. During his two-year tenure on the D.C. Circuit, Roberts authored 49 opinions, eliciting two dissents from other judges, and authoring three dissents of his own. In 2005, Roberts was nominated to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court, initially to succeed retiring Sandra Day O\'Connor . When Rehnquist died before Roberts's confirmation hearings began, Bush instead nominated Roberts to fill the chief justice position.
Roberts has authored the majority opinion in many landmark cases, including _Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 _, _ Shelby County v. Holder _, and _National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius _.
* 1 Early years * 2 Early legal career
* 3 On the D.C. Circuit
* 3.1 Fourth and Fifth Amendments * 3.2 Military tribunals * 3.3 Environmental regulation
* 4 Nomination and confirmation to the Supreme Court
* 4.1 Roberts\'s testimony on his jurisprudence
* 4.2 Confirmation
* 5 On the U.S. Supreme Court
* 5.1 Early decisions
* 5.2 Fourth Amendment
* 5.3 Notice and opportunity to be heard
* 6 Personal life
* 6.1 Health * 6.2 Personal finances
* 7 Bibliography of articles by Roberts * 8 See also
* 9 Further reading
* 9.1 News articles * 9.2 Government/official biographies * 9.3 Other
* 10 References * 11 External links
John Glover Roberts was born in
Buffalo, New York
Roberts attended Notre Dame Elementary School, a Roman Catholic grade
school in Long Beach. In 1973, he graduated from
La Lumiere School , a
Roman Catholic boarding school in La Porte,
He attended Harvard College , graduating in 1976 with an Artium Baccalaureus degree _summa cum laude _ in history in three years. He then attended Harvard Law School where he was a managing editor of the _ Harvard Law Review _. He graduated from law school with a Juris Doctor _magna cum laude _ in 1979.
EARLY LEGAL CAREER
After graduating from law school, Roberts served as a law clerk for
Roberts entered private law practice in 1986 as an associate at the
Hogan & Hartson to serve in the George H. W. Bush
administration as principal deputy solicitor general, from 1989 to
1993 and as acting solicitor general for the purposes of at least one
In 1992, George H. W. Bush nominated Roberts to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit , but no Senate vote was held, and Roberts's nomination expired at the end of the 102nd Congress .
Roberts returned to Hogan & Hartson as a partner and became the head of the firm's appellate practice in addition to serving as an adjunct faculty member at the Georgetown University Law Center . During this time, Roberts argued 39 cases before the Supreme Court, prevailing in 25 of them. He represented 19 states in _United States v. Microsoft _. Those cases include:
CASE ARGUED DECIDED REPRESENTED
First Options v. Kaplan
_ Adams v. Robertson _, 520 U.S. 83 January 14, 1997 March 3, 1997 Respondent
_ Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government _, 522 U.S. 520 December 10, 1997 February 25, 1999 Petitioner
_ Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. _, 523 U.S. 340 January 21, 1998 March 31, 1998 Petitioner
_ National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Smith _, 525 U.S. 459 January 20, 1999 February 23, 1999 Petitioner
_ Rice v. Cayetano _, 528 U.S. 495 October 6, 1999 February 23, 2000 Respondent
_ Eastern Associated Coal Corp. v. Mine Workers _, 531 U.S. 57 October 2, 2000 November 28, 2000 Petitioner
_ TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc. _, 532 U.S. 23 November 29, 2000 March 20, 2001 Petitioner
_ Toyota Motor Manufacturing v. Williams _, 534 U.S. 184 November 7, 2001 January 8, 2002 Petitioner
_Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency _, 535 U.S. 302 January 7, 2002 April 23, 2002 Respondent
_ Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran _, 536 U.S. 355 January 16, 2002 June 20, 2002 Petitioner
_ Gonzaga University v. Doe _, 536 U.S. 273 April 24, 2002 June 20, 2002 Petitioner
_ Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co. _, 537 U.S. 149 October 8, 2002 January 15, 2003 Respondent
_ Smith v. Doe _, 538 U.S. 84 November 13, 2002 March 5, 2003 Petitioner
During the late 1990s, while working for Hogan "e are asked to hold that it violates the United States Constitution. And that, I cannot do."
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld _, Roberts was part of a unanimous Circuit
panel overturning the district court ruling and upholding military
tribunals set up by the Bush administration for trying terrorism
suspects known as enemy combatants . Circuit Judge A. Raymond
Randolph, writing for the court, ruled that
Salim Ahmed Hamdan , a
driver for al-Qaeda leader
Osama bin Laden
* the military commission had the approval of the United States
Third Geneva Convention is a treaty between nations and as
such it does not confer individual rights and remedies enforceable in
* even if the Convention could be enforced in U.S. courts, it would
not be of assistance to Hamdan at the time because, for a conflict
such as the war against
Al-Qaeda (considered by the court as a
separate war from that against
The court held open the possibility of judicial review of the results of the military commission after the current proceedings ended. This decision was overturned on June 29, 2006 by the Supreme Court in a 5–3 decision, with Roberts not participating due to his prior participation in the case as a circuit judge.
Roberts wrote a dissent in _Rancho Viejo, LLC v. Norton_, 323 F.3d 1062, a case involving the protection of a rare California toad under the Endangered Species Act . When the court denied a rehearing en banc , 334 F.3d 1158 (D.C. Cir. 2003), Roberts dissented, arguing that the panel opinion was inconsistent with _ United States v. Lopez _ and _ United States v. Morrison _ in that it incorrectly focused on whether the _regulation_ substantially affects interstate commerce rather than on whether the regulated _activity_ does. In Roberts's view, the Commerce Clause of the Constitution did not permit the government to regulate activity affecting what he called "a hapless toad" that "for reasons of its own, lives its entire life in California." He said that reviewing the panel decision would allow the court "alternative grounds for sustaining application of the Act that may be more consistent with Supreme Court precedent."
NOMINATION AND CONFIRMATION TO THE SUPREME COURT
John Roberts Supreme Court nomination and hearings
On July 19, 2005, President Bush nominated Roberts to the U.S.
Supreme Court to fill a vacancy that would be created by the
retirement of Justice Sandra Day O\'Connor . Roberts was the first
Supreme Court nominee since
Stephen Breyer in 1994. Bush announced
Roberts's nomination in a live, nationwide television broadcast from
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist died on September 3, 2005, while Roberts's confirmation was still pending before the Senate. Shortly thereafter, on September 5, Bush withdrew Roberts's nomination as O'Connor's successor and announced Roberts's new nomination to the position of Chief Justice. Bush asked the Senate to expedite Roberts's confirmation hearings to fill the vacancy by the beginning of the Supreme Court's session in early October.
ROBERTS\'S TESTIMONY ON HIS JURISPRUDENCE
During his confirmation hearings, Roberts said that he did not have a comprehensive jurisprudential philosophy, and he did "not think beginning with an all-encompassing approach to constitutional interpretation is the best way to faithfully construe the document". Roberts analogized judges to baseball umpires: "t's my job to call balls and strikes, and not to pitch or bat." Roberts demonstrated an encyclopedic knowledge of Supreme Court precedent, which he discussed without notes. Among the issues he discussed were:
In Senate hearings, Roberts has stated:
Starting with _McCulloch v. Maryland_, Chief Justice John Marshall gave a very broad and expansive reading to the powers of the Federal Government and explained generally that if the ends be legitimate, then any means chosen to achieve them are within the power of the Federal Government, and cases interpreting that, throughout the years, have come down. Certainly, by the time _Lopez_ was decided, many of us had learned in law school that it was just sort of a formality to say that interstate commerce was affected and that cases weren't going to be thrown out that way. _Lopez_ certainly breathed new life into the Commerce Clause .
I think it remains to be seen, in subsequent decisions, how rigorous a showing, and in many cases, it is just a showing. It's not a question of an abstract fact, does this affect interstate commerce or not, but has this body, the Congress, demonstrated the impact on interstate commerce that drove them to legislate? That's a very important factor. It wasn't present in _Lopez_ at all. I think the members of Congress had heard the same thing I had heard in law school, that this is unimportant—and they hadn't gone through the process of establishing a record in that case.
Roberts stated the following about federalism in a 1999 radio interview:
We have gotten to the point these days where we think the only way we can show we’re serious about a problem is if we pass a federal law, whether it is the Violence Against Women Act or anything else. The fact of the matter is conditions are different in different states, and state laws can be more relevant is I think exactly the right term, more attune to the different situations in New York, as opposed to Minnesota, and that is what the Federal system is based on.
Reviewing Acts Of Congress
At a Senate hearing, Roberts stated:
The Supreme Court has, throughout its history, on many occasions described the deference that is due to legislative judgments. Justice Holmes described assessing the constitutionality of an act of Congress as the gravest duty that the Supreme Court is called upon to perform. ... It's a principle that is easily stated and needs to be observed in practice, as well as in theory.
Now, the Court, of course, has the obligation, and has been
recognized since _
Marbury v. Madison
On the subject of _stare decisis _, referring to _Brown v. Board _, the decision overturning school segregation , Roberts said that "the Court in that case, of course, overruled a prior decision. I don't think that constitutes judicial activism because obviously if the decision is wrong, it should be overruled. That's not activism. That's applying the law correctly."
_Roe V. Wade_
While working as a lawyer for the Reagan administration, Roberts
wrote legal memos defending administration policies on abortion. At
his nomination hearing Roberts testified that the legal memos
represented the views of the administration he was representing at the
time and not necessarily his own. "Senator, I was a staff lawyer; I
didn't have a position," Roberts said. As a lawyer in the George H.
W. Bush administration , Roberts signed a legal brief urging the court
to overturn _
Roe v. Wade
In private meetings with senators before his confirmation, Roberts testified that _Roe_ was settled law, but added that it was subject to the legal principle of _stare decisis ,_ meaning that while the Court must give some weight to the precedent, it was not legally bound to uphold it.
In his Senate testimony, Roberts said that, while sitting on the
Appellate Court , he had an obligation to respect precedents
established by the Supreme Court, including the right to an abortion .
He stated: "_
Roe v. Wade
On September 22, the
Senate Judiciary Committee approved Roberts's
nomination by a vote of 13–5, with Senators
ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT
Roberts took the Constitutional oath of office , administered by
John Paul Stevens at the
Seventh Circuit Judge Diane Sykes , surveying Roberts's first term on the court, concluded that his jurisprudence "appears to be strongly rooted in the discipline of traditional legal method, evincing a fidelity to text, structure, history, and the constitutional hierarchy. He exhibits the restraint that flows from the careful application of established decisional rules and the practice of reasoning from the case law. He appears to place great stock in the process-oriented tools and doctrinal rules that guard against the aggregation of judicial power and keep judicial discretion in check: jurisdictional limits, structural federalism, textualism, and the procedural rules that govern the scope of judicial review." The Chief Justice is currently ranked 65th in the Forbes ranking of "The World's Most Powerful People."
On January 17, 2006, Roberts dissented along with
On March 6, 2006, Roberts wrote the unanimous decision in _Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights _ that colleges accepting federal money must allow military recruiters on campus, despite university objections to the Clinton administration -initiated "don\'t ask, don\'t tell " policy.
Roberts wrote his first dissent in _ Georgia v. Randolph _ (2006). The majority's decision prohibited police from searching a home if both occupants are present but one objected and the other consented. Roberts criticized the majority opinion as inconsistent with prior case law and for partly basing its reasoning on its perception of social custom. He said the social expectations test was flawed because the Fourth Amendment protects a legitimate expectation of privacy, not social expectations.
In _ Utah v. Strieff _ (2016), Roberts joined the majority in ruling (5-3) that a person with an outstanding warrant may be arrested and searched, and that any evidence discovered based on that search is admissible in court; the majority opinion held that this remains true even when police act unlawfully by stopping a person without probable cause , before learning of the existence of the outstanding warrant.
NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD
Although Roberts has often sided with Scalia and Thomas, Roberts provided a crucial vote against their position in _ Jones v. Flowers _. In _Jones_, Roberts sided with liberal justices of the court in ruling that, before a home is seized and sold in a tax-forfeiture sale, due diligence must be demonstrated and proper notification needs to be sent to the owners. Dissenting were Anthony Kennedy along with Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas . Samuel Alito did not participate, while Roberts's opinion was joined by David Souter , Stephen Breyer , John Paul Stevens , and Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
On the Supreme Court, Roberts has indicated he supports some abortion
restrictions. In _
Gonzales v. Carhart _ (2007), he voted with the
majority to uphold the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion
Ban Act . Justice
Anthony Kennedy , writing for a five-justice
majority, distinguished _
Stenberg v. Carhart _, and concluded that the
court's previous decision in _
Planned Parenthood v. Casey _ did not
prevent Congress from banning the procedure. The decision left the
door open for future as-applied challenges , and did not address the
broader question of whether Congress had the authority to pass the
Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion, contending
that the Court's prior decisions in _
Roe v. Wade
EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE
Roberts opposes the use of race in assigning students to particular schools, including for purposes such as maintaining integrated schools. He sees such plans as discrimination in violation of the constitution's Equal Protection Clause and _Brown v. Board of Education _. In _Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 _, the court considered two voluntarily adopted school district plans that relied on race to determine which schools certain children may attend. The court had held in _Brown_ that "racial discrimination in public education is unconstitutional," and later, that "racial classifications, imposed by whatever federal, state, or local governmental actor, ... are constitutional only if they are narrowly tailored measures that further compelling governmental interests," and that this "arrow tailoring ... require serious, good faith consideration of workable race-neutral alternatives." Roberts cited these cases in writing for the _Parents Involved_ majority, concluding that the school districts had "failed to show that they considered methods other than explicit racial classifications to achieve their stated goals." In a section of the opinion joined by four other Justices, Roberts added that "he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."
Roberts authored the 2007 student free speech case _Morse v. Frederick _, ruling that a student in a public school-sponsored activity does not have the right to advocate drug use on the basis that the right to free speech does not invariably prevent the exercise of school discipline.
On April 20, 2010, in _ United States v. Stevens _, the Supreme Court struck down an animal cruelty law. Roberts, writing for an 8–1 majority, found that a federal statute criminalizing the commercial production, sale, or possession of depictions of cruelty to animals, was an unconstitutional abridgment of the First Amendment right to freedom of speech. The Court held that the statute was substantially overbroad; for example, it could allow prosecutions for selling photos of out-of-season hunting.
HEALTH CARE REFORM
On June 28, 2012, Roberts delivered the majority opinion in _National
Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius _, which upheld the
Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act by a 5–4 vote. The Court
indicated that although the "individual mandate" component of the Act
could not be upheld under the
Commerce Clause , the mandate could be
construed as a tax and was therefore ruled to be valid under
Congress\'s authority to "lay and collect taxes." The Court
overturned a portion of the law related to the withholding of funds
from states that did not comply with the expansion of
COMPARISON TO OTHER COURT MEMBERS
Roberts has been compared and contrasted to other court members by
commentators. Although Roberts is identified as having a
conservative judicial philosophy, his vote in _National Federation of
Independent Business v. Sebelius _ to uphold the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act (ACA) caused the press to contrast him with
the Rehnquist court. Roberts is seen as having a more moderate
conservative orientation, particularly when _
Bush v. Gore _ is
compared to Roberts' vote for the ACA. Roberts' judicial philosophy
is seen as more moderate and conciliatory than
NON-JUDICIAL DUTIES OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE
Problems playing these files? See media help ._
As Chief Justice, Roberts also serves in a variety of non-judicial
roles, including Chancellor of the
Smithsonian Institution and leading
Judicial Conference of the United States . Perhaps the best known
of these is the custom of the Chief Justice administering the oath of
office at Presidential inaugurations. Roberts debuted in this capacity
at the inauguration of
Through intermediaries, Roberts and Obama had agreed how to divide the thirty-five-word oath for the swearing in. Obama was first supposed to repeat the clause “I, Barack Hussein Obama, do solemnly swear.” But, when Obama heard Roberts begin to speak, he interrupted Roberts before he said “do solemnly swear.” This apparently flustered the Chief Justice, who then made a mistake in the next line, inserting the word “faithfully” out of order. Obama smiled, apparently recognizing the error, then tried to follow along. Roberts then garbled another word in the next passage, before correctly reciting, “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Part of the difficulty was that Roberts did not have the text of the oath with him but relied on his memory. On later occasions when Roberts has administered an oath, he has taken the text with him.
Associated Press reported that "ater, as the two men shook hands
in the Capitol, Roberts appeared to say the mistake was his fault."
The following evening in the
Roberts is one of thirteen Catholic justices—out of 111 justices
total—in the history of the Supreme Court. Of those thirteen
justices, five (Roberts,
Anthony Kennedy ,
Clarence Thomas , Samuel
Alito , and
Roberts suffered a seizure on July 30, 2007, while at his vacation home on Hupper Island off the village of Port Clyde in St. George, Maine . As a result of the seizure he fell 5 to 10 feet (1.5 to 3.0 m) on a dock near his house but suffered only minor scrapes. He was taken by private boat to the mainland (which is several hundred yards from the island) and then by ambulance to Penobscot Bay Medical Center in Rockport , where he stayed overnight, according to Supreme Court spokesperson Kathy Arberg. Doctors called the incident a benign idiopathic seizure, which means there was no identifiable physiological cause.
Roberts had suffered a similar seizure in 1993. After this first seizure, Roberts temporarily limited some of his activities, such as driving. According to Senator Arlen Specter , who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee during Roberts's nomination to be Chief Justice in 2005, senators were aware of this seizure when they were considering his nomination, but the committee did not think it was significant enough to bring up during his confirmation hearings. Federal judges are not required by law to release information about their health.
According to neurologist Marc Schlosberg of Washington Hospital Center , who has no direct connection to the Roberts case, someone who has had more than one seizure without any other cause is by definition determined to have epilepsy . After two seizures, the likelihood of another at some point is greater than 60 percent. Steven Garner of New York Methodist Hospital , who is also uninvolved with the case, said that Roberts's previous history of seizures means that the second incident may be less serious than if this were a newly emerging problem.
The Supreme Court said in a statement that Roberts has "fully
recovered from the incident" and that a neurological evaluation
"revealed no cause for concern."
According to a 16-page financial disclosure form Roberts submitted to
Senate Judiciary Committee prior to his Supreme Court confirmation
hearings, his net worth was more than $6 million, including $1.6
million in stock holdings. At the time Roberts left private practice
to join the D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals in 2003, he took a pay cut
from $1 million a year to $171,800; as Chief Justice, his salary is
$255,500 as of 2014. Roberts also holds a one-eighth interest in a
Knocklong , an Irish village in
In August 2010, Roberts sold his stock in Pfizer , which allowed him to participate in two pending cases involving the pharmaceutical maker. Justices are required to recuse themselves in cases in which they own stock of a party.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ARTICLES BY ROBERTS
The University of Michigan Law Library (External Links, below) has compiled fulltext links to these articles and a number of briefs and arguments.
* _Developments in the Law—Zoning, "The Takings Clause"_, 91 Harv. L. Rev. 1462 (1978). (Section III of a longer article beginning on p. 1427) * _Comment, "Contract Clause—Legislative Alteration of Private Pension Agreements: Allied Structural Steel Co. v. Spannaus,"_ 92 Harv. L. Rev. 86 (1978). (Subsection C of a longer article beginning on p. 57) * _New Rules and Old Pose Stumbling Blocks in High Court Cases,_ _ Legal Times _, February 26, 1990, co-authored with E. Barrett Prettyman Jr. * "Article III Limits on Statutory Standing". _Duke Law Journal_. 42: 1219. 1993. doi :10.2307/1372783 . * _Riding the Coattails of the Solicitor General,_ _ Legal Times _, March 29, 1993. * _The New Solicitor General and the Power of the Amicus,_ _The Wall Street Journal _, May 5, 1993. * "The 1992–1993 Supreme Court". _Public Interest Law Review_. 107. 1994. * _Forfeitures: Does Innocence Matter?,_ _New Jersey Law Journal_, October 9, 1995. * _Thoughts on Presenting an Effective Oral Argument,_ _School Law in Review_ (1997). Link * _The Bush Panel,_ 2003 BYU L. Rev. 62 (2003). (Part of a tribute to Rex. E. Lee beginning on p. 1. "The Bush Panel" contains a speech by Roberts.) * Roberts, JOHN G. (2005). "Oral Advocacy and the Re-emergence of a Supreme Court Bar". _Journal of Supreme Court History_. 30 (1): 68–81. doi :10.1111/j.1059-4329.2005.00098.x . * "What Makes the D.C. Circuit Different? A Historical View" (PDF). _Virginia Law Review_. 92 (3): 375. 2006. * "A Tribute to Chief Justice Rehnquist" (PDF). _Harvard Law Review_. 119: 1. 2005.
_ Wikiquote has quotations related to: JOHN ROBERTS _
* Demographics of the
Supreme Court of the United States
* "Roberts Listed in Federalist Society '97–98 Directory". Washington Post. July 25, 2005. * "Appellate judge Roberts is Bush high-court pick." MSNBC. July 19, 2005. * Argetsinger, Amy, and Jo Becker. "The nominee as a young pragmatist: under Reagan, Roberts tackled tough issues." _Washington Post_. July 22, 2005. * Barbash, Fred, et al.: "Bush to nominate Judge John G. Roberts Jr." _Washington Post_. July 19, 2005. * Becker, Jo, and R. Jeffrey Smith. "Record of accomplishment—and some contradictions". _The Washington Post_. July 20, 2005. * Bumuller, Elisabeth, and David Stout: "President chooses conservative judge as nominee to court." _New York Times_. July 19, 2005. * Entous, Adam. "Bush picks conservative Roberts for Supreme Court." Reuters. July 19, 2005. * Goodnough, Abby. "Nominee Gave Quiet Advice on Recount" New York Times. July 21, 2005. * Lane, Charles. "Federalist affiliation misstated: Roberts does not belong to group." _Washington Post_. July 21, 2005. * Lane, Charles. "Short record as judge is under a microscope." _Washington Post_. July 21, 2005. * Groppe, Maureen, and John Tuohy. "If you ask John where he's from, he says Indiana." _Indianapolis Star_. July 20, 2005. * McFeatters, Ann. "John G. Roberts Jr. is Bush choice for Supreme Court." _Pittsburgh Post-Gazette_. July 19, 2005. * Riechmann, Deb. "Federal judge Roberts is Bush's choice." Associated Press. July 20, 2005. * "Colleagues call high court nominee a smart, self-effacing 'Eagle Scout '." New York Times. July 20, 2005. * "Who Is John G. Roberts Jr.?" ABC News. July 19, 2005.
* "President announces Judge
* Coffin, Shannen W. "Meet John Roberts: The President Makes the Best Choice." _National Review Online_. July 19, 2005. * "Former Hogan & Hartson partner nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court." Hogan -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;">
* ^ "The Echo Chamber". Reuters. * ^ "Biographies of Current Justices of the Supreme Court". supremecourt.gov. * ^ _A_ _B_ Kathy Gill. "John G. Roberts, Jr - Supreme Court Chief Justice - Biography". _About.com News & Issues_. * ^ _A_ _B_ "John G. Roberts, Jr.". oyez.org. * ^ _A_ _B_ _C_ _D_ _E_ _F_ _G_ _H_ _I_ Purdum, Todd S. ; Jodi Wilgoren; Pam Belluck (July 21, 2005). "Court Nominee\'s Life Is Rooted in Faith and Respect for Law". _The New York Times_. Retrieved December 5, 2008. * ^ "Jane Sullivan Robert’s Rules for Success". irishamerica.com.
* ^ "Notre Dame Parish: Alumni". Notre Dame
* FJC Bio
Wikisource has original works written by or