[sourcery]

” Roberts wrote: “The very terms of the fifth amendment, furthermore, are sufficiently flexible to accommodate changing notions of what compensation is ‘just.’”

And with that, I must be implacably opposed to Roberts ever serving as a judge in any court, let alone the US Supreme Court.

[FReethesheeples]

Alarming quote of yours from Roberts: "Roberts wrote: “ "The very terms of the fifth amendment, furthermore, are sufficiently flexible to accommodate changing notions of what compensation is ‘just." ’”" If this is an accurate quote, your further comment is potentially justified in my view, --- although there are many possible meanings to what is "just" since he may possibly have meant simply, for instance, that land or real estate tends, over time, to go up in value, altough he is disturbingly vague unless his quote is given more CONTEXT: You continued: "And with that, I must be implacably opposed to Roberts ever serving as a judge in any court, let alone the US Supreme Court."

[elbucko]

And with that, I must be implacably opposed to Roberts ever serving as a judge in any court, let alone the US Supreme Court.

I agree. The US is overpopulated with lawyers who do not know the definition of justice or that the word "Just" represents the = sign in the legal affairs of men.

Roberts is beginning to appear as "just" (='s) another Souter on steroids.