Skip to main content

View Diary: SCOTUS: Roberts Helped Pro-Gay Rights Coalition in Key Case (167 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  At that time, (none)
    Clinton wasn't very popular and the House/Senate were controlled heavily by Republicans, so I don't know. I guess anything is possible. If the person who asked him to do this is retired now, he probably wasn't younger.
    •  I don't see how it's relevant (none)
      whether the lawyer he was helping was younger or older.  If the lawyer was older, then Roberts may have owed him or her a favor or hoped to get one in the future.  I don't know.  And in fact, that was my point.  I'm not saying that I know why Roberts worked on Romer and DavidNYC doesn't.  I hope he worked on it because he thought the Colorado bay-disenfranchisement law violated the Constitution.  I certainly think it did.  But my point here was just that, as a general matter, the positions that a lawyer-for-hire like Roberts takes don't necessarily indicate his own views.  And while it's true that a lawyer can choose his pro bono cases, and most lawyers prefer to do pro bono work only for causes that they personally support, that isn't necessarily the case in the world of Supreme Court practice.  If it turns out to have been the case here, then that's great.  But Roberts may have had purely professional reasons for doing a little behind-the-scenes work on this case.  

      Join the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy --

      by yella dawg dem on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 12:13:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The reason I brought up his age is because (none)
        someone said that he was probably just helping a younger lawyer.

        If Roberts really was opposed to gays, and he was a big success for this firm, I just don't see why they would have demanded his help. And if he really did hate gays to such a high degree, he never would have gone out of his way to help.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site