August 04, 2005
Roberts and the Gays
The fact that Roberts worked on a gay rights case is both reassuring and irrelevant.
It’s reassuring, because it shows he’s not so conservative as to refuse to work on a case he didn’t personally agree with and he did a good job at working on the argument, and he did it for free.
It is irrelevant because there’s a difference between helping someone argue a law, and interpreting a law (as he would as a Justice). This does not, in any way, show that Roberts is a moderate nor that he has a pro-gay slant.
It also doesn’t help us understand his view of the constitution.
Update
The rightwingers at FRC are downplaying Robert’s involvement in the case saying his help didn’t amount to much, and he did it for all the pro bono cases.
As does Ramesh Ponnuru at the corner.
Comments:Mike said (at August 4, 2005 12:12 PM):
You are incorrect about John Roberts. I believe his working on the gay civil rights case is very relevant. If he had turned down working on the case you would have made the argument just the opposite, that it did show how he would interpret the constitution - anti-gay rights. Liberals are not going to be happy with anyone Bush nominates. They were ready to immediately pounce on whoever it was. Unlike most liberals, this shows that John Roberts can think for himself.
Even some of your fellow Liberals see your leaderships hypocrisy.
Henry said (at August 4, 2005 04:08 PM):
See, I disagree. You have to look at larger picture, I think. I did say that his helping is somewhat reassuring. On the other hand, there are practices within law firms where you work on the cases that the law firm accepts, regardless of your beliefs.
This is just not telling at all about how he would perform as a Justice.