Skip to comments.
Roberts worked for gay rights activists
The Baltimore Sun ^
| 8/4/05
| Richard Serrano
Posted on 08/04/2005 7:24:32 AM PDT by conserv13
WASHINGTON - Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. worked behind the scenes for a coalition of gay rights activists, and his legal expertise helped them persuade the Supreme Court to issue a landmark 1996 ruling protecting people against discrimination because of their sexual orientation.
Then a private lawyer in Washington specializing in appellate work, Roberts helped represent the gay activists as part of his pro bono work at his law firm. He did not write the legal briefs or argue the case before the high court; he was instrumental in reviewing the filings and preparing oral arguments, several lawyers intimately involved in the case said.
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gay; homosexualagenda; johnroberts; roberts; romervevans; scotus; stupidsubject; ussc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 341-359 next last
1
posted on
08/04/2005 7:24:33 AM PDT
by
conserv13
To: conserv13
2
posted on
08/04/2005 7:24:59 AM PDT
by
Dolphan
(It's the 99% of Mohammedans that make the other 1% look bad.)
To: conserv13
3
posted on
08/04/2005 7:25:22 AM PDT
by
brivette
To: conserv13
He also worked for Democrats. What does it matter?
4
posted on
08/04/2005 7:25:55 AM PDT
by
msnimje
To: brivette
Hit piece? Are you saying that the facts are wrong?
To: conserv13
Pro-Bono the gay lobby is one of the richest groups in the country. why Pro-bono?
6
posted on
08/04/2005 7:27:46 AM PDT
by
since1868
To: conserv13
All Roberts may have done is to assist, perhaps answer a few questions, a co-worker. Standard in any Law office!
7
posted on
08/04/2005 7:29:11 AM PDT
by
ncountylee
(Dead terrorists smell like victory)
To: conserv13
his legal expertise helped them persuade the Supreme Court to issue a landmark 1996 ruling protecting people against discrimination because of their sexual orientation.And the problem is.....?
8
posted on
08/04/2005 7:29:14 AM PDT
by
syriacus
(Embryos -- Special enough that researchers want a lot of them; not special enough to deserve to live)
To: msnimje
it doesn't but it gives Coulter fans and the tin foil crew something to scream about.
9
posted on
08/04/2005 7:29:38 AM PDT
by
MikefromOhio
(When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day....I intend to laugh too....)
To: conserv13
Posted twice already.
10
posted on
08/04/2005 7:30:13 AM PDT
by
TheBigB
(Never insult seven men if you're only holding a six-gun.)
To: conserv13
Oh no. Someone with his stature wouldn't have to take on a pro-bono project like this unless he wanted to. Damn.
To: syriacus
The problem is, that the Supreme Court invented a constitutional right to homosexual sodomy.
To: ncountylee
I predict, when Roberts is confirmed, that some on FR have a Schiavo type meltdown for approximately a week or so.
I'll pop the popcorn.
13
posted on
08/04/2005 7:35:36 AM PDT
by
MikefromOhio
(When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day....I intend to laugh too....)
To: conserv13
It's irrelevant.
14
posted on
08/04/2005 7:36:38 AM PDT
by
TheForceOfOne
(The alternative media is our Enigma machine.)
To: MikeinIraq
I'll pop the popcorn. How about opening the Tinfoil Hat Online Pharmacy instead? Could make a fortune selling Prozac and Paxil to those having a meltdown. ;-)
15
posted on
08/04/2005 7:38:26 AM PDT
by
peyton randolph
(Warning! It is illegal to fatwah a camel in all 50 states)
To: peyton randolph
NICE!!!!
I am going to do that!!!!
16
posted on
08/04/2005 7:39:33 AM PDT
by
MikefromOhio
(When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
To: Austin Willard Wright
No, I'm saying this is a hit piece.
17
posted on
08/04/2005 7:40:48 AM PDT
by
brivette
To: brivette
To: MikeinIraq
You seem to think the lack of resistance from the Democrats is a good sign. He's their dream come true if this is any indication.
It has nothing to do with tin foil. It's called critical analysis.
To: Rutles4Ever
LOL
right they aren't resisting because they can't and there IS a difference in Borking a Supreme Court nominee rather than an appellate court nominee.
This is a non issue.
Otherwise, I refer you to my tagline.
20
posted on
08/04/2005 7:42:57 AM PDT
by
MikefromOhio
(When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 341-359 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson