[Antoninus]

Unless he volunteered for this particular case because he thought it was such a good cause...

Unfortunately, pro bono indicates to me that he volunteered. Roberts appears to be morphing into Souter before our very eyes.

Five years from now if there's a 6-3 or 7-2 pro-sodomy majority on the SCOTUS, we may look back and rue the day we ever thought that G. W. Bush was any different than his daddy. I pray there's something to this story that we're missing.

[little jeremiah]

I hope that you are wrong. But since I am just like a small ant, knowing nothing but what little I managed to scan on FR, what do I know?

My personal POV is that the system in general is so FUBAR that nothing will turn it around/save it other than divine intervetion of one sort or another. And I mean more than just the SCOTUS, obviously.

Just because the fight looks hopeless sometimes doesn't mean we shouldn't fight with every ounce of our strength.

[antiRepublicrat]

Unfortunately, pro bono indicates to me that he volunteered.

Looks like he just did a favor for a fellow attorney and reviewed a case of his. There is nothing to this at all.

[arasina]

Unfortunately, pro bono indicates to me that he volunteered.

Not necessarily. He could've either been helping out a colleague or fulfilling a 'pro bono quota' that some law firms have as a requirement. Either way, it was excellent experience for him. I'd much rather have a SCOTUS nominee who knows his Constitutional law and uses that to make decisions than to judge using personal feelings or political bias.

I guess I just don't get it: why is it that Liberals are detested for doing the very things you expect of a supposedly good Conservative? You don't really want that kind of slanted justice, do you?