Preserve the Balance
Team Supreme Blog
What do they know, that we don't?
I don't know about you but it is extremely interesting to see the right wing's reaction or lack of reaction to the news that John Roberts provided assistance to those litigating Romer v. Evans. From what we've seen, the majority of the anti-gay groups are downplaying the news -- essentially telling their conservative members throughout the nation not to worry about it.
This leads me to a question...what do they know that we don't know about his own judicial philosophy? How he acted as an attorney on behalf of clients, in this case members of our community challenging an anti-gay constituional amendment, does nothing to shed any light on how he would rule as a lifetime member of the Supreme Court.
Still, it seems we have more questions than answers...
This leads me to a question...what do they know that we don't know about his own judicial philosophy? How he acted as an attorney on behalf of clients, in this case members of our community challenging an anti-gay constituional amendment, does nothing to shed any light on how he would rule as a lifetime member of the Supreme Court.
Still, it seems we have more questions than answers...
Roberts and Romer: More Questions than Answers
The LA Times today published a story indicating that Roberts worked "behind the scenes for gay rights activists" in the landmark case Romer v. Evans in 1996. Roberts work with the attorneys challenging the anti-gay constitutional amendment is noteworthy. But, this story raises more questions than answers.
Roberts has said that an attorney's personal views should not be inferred by work done for a client. He said this after concerns were raised about a brief in which he wrote that Roe v. Wade, which is legally related to the Lawrence v. Texas case striking down discriminatory sodomy laws, was "was wrongly decided and should be overruled".
Given all of this, it is increasingly important for the Senate Judiciary Committee to undertake a rigorous review of his record and probe his judicial philosophy.
Roberts has said that an attorney's personal views should not be inferred by work done for a client. He said this after concerns were raised about a brief in which he wrote that Roe v. Wade, which is legally related to the Lawrence v. Texas case striking down discriminatory sodomy laws, was "was wrongly decided and should be overruled".
Given all of this, it is increasingly important for the Senate Judiciary Committee to undertake a rigorous review of his record and probe his judicial philosophy.
Welcome to HRC Supreme Court Blog
The HRC team wanted to be able to provide HRC members and other Americans supportive of equal rights for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community an inside look at HRC's work on the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court. We have created this blog, where key staff from HRC who are working on this issue will be able to provide you with up to date information on the nomination.
As the nomination moves forward, please stay tuned to this blog for breaking news on the Supreme Court. And, as always should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to e-mail us at hrc@hrc.org. Thanks.
As the nomination moves forward, please stay tuned to this blog for breaking news on the Supreme Court. And, as always should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to e-mail us at hrc@hrc.org. Thanks.
.