My Two Cents on John Roberts

I got in late to work today. Went to the dentist this morning. No cavities, but I need to floss more. Whatever.

So I'm a little behind on this, but here goes.

Naral has a nice .pdf document on Robert's anti-choice history. Evidently he has a history of bringing Roe v. Wade into legal discussions that have nothing to do with Roe v. Wade, and those nutty legal-types with their delightful sense of humor offer up some gentle ribbing.

Overturning a woman’s right to choose was a cornerstone of the first
Bush Administration, as signaled by the fact that Solicitor General
Kenneth Starr himself argued reproductive rights cases before the
Supreme Court. The Court was so accustomed to the Solicitor General
and the Principal Deputy Solicitor General arguing for the overturn of
Roe that, during Mr. Roberts’ oral argument before the Supreme Court in
Bray, a Justice asked, “Mr. Roberts, in this case are you asking that
Roe v. Wade be overruled?” He responded, “No, your honor, the issue
doesn’t even come up.” To this, the Justice said, “Well that hasn’t
prevented the Solicitor General from taking that position in prior
cases.”

Then there's acbonin from Daily Kos, who suggests that we don't know enough about Roberts to judge his stance on Roe v. Wade or anything else for that matter, but that he needs to answer some tough questions so we can get to know him. Also, we should use this as an opportunity to educate folks on just what kind of havoc conservative legal philosophy can wreak.

During the next few months, the point will not be whether Roberts
responds to the requests with documents and answers; it is that we are
asking these questions and keeping these issues before the public. The
point of our opposition is not, given what we know now, to block his
confirmation by any means necessary -- it is to reveal what conservative
legal philosophy is, so that the public will want to guard against it,
and vote against it, in the future. If we can use this as an educational
moment, we can take back the Senate and the White House.

And before you get your panties in a bunch about Roe v. Wade being overturned, remember that previous to O'Conner's retirement, the court was 6-3 in favor of Roe v. Wade. If the newest appointee is against it, that makes it 5-4. Then if Renquist retires and gets replaced by an anti-choice fascist, it's still 5-4. So, the balance on this one issue won't be tipped, at least for awhile.

The Washington Post has an interesting article on where we can expect Roberts to stand on abortion, the environment and other issues.

And Joel Achenbach suggests that he looks like the little man on the wedding cake and that he wants to overturn the Magna Carta.