Surprise! SCOTUS nominee Roberts is a hack
What's the first question the Senate should ask Roberts? Craig Crawford says it's: "Does the Constitution recognize and protect an unenumerated right of privacy?"
Tim Tagaris & Bob Brigham do Peek's work and post the roundup on Bush's SCOTUS nominee, John Roberts:
"An ethically challenged lawyer appointed by an ethically challenged 'win-at-all-cost' administration:
U.S. v. Smithfield Foods - Roberts representing a pork processing company against Clean Water Act violations. This is what the court had to say about Roberts the litigator:
'The mischaracterization and distortion of this Memorandum is frustrating...A totally misleading argument presented to this court.'"
In addition, you'll find:
- Roberts on Roe v. Wade -- "We continue to believe that Roe was wrongfully decided and should be overturned..."
- Jeralyn already debunks the Right's first talking point, that he was approved by the Senate to the Appeals Court overhwlemingly.
- PFAW on John Roberts.
- The dkosopedia page on John Roberts
- The Wikipedia page on John Roberts.
- And the John G. Robert's 2003 Confirmation Hearings.
Shakespeare's Sister finds the thread connecting Roberts, Rove and the Downing St. Memos.
Lindsay recounts one of Roberts' "greatest hits," the tale of a 12-year-old dragged away in handcuffs.
And gee, what's the timing all about? Dave Johnson quotes a Republican representative tipping the GOP hand...