Credit where credit is due... Ann Coulter may be a bit (or even more than a bit) crazy now, but I remember that she was one of the few who was (correctly) skeptical of Roberts 15 years ago. “Roberts would have been a fine candidate for a Senate in Democratic hands. But now we have 55 Republican seats in the Senate and the vice president to cast a deciding vote — and Son of Read-My-Lips gives us another ideological blind date”
unbelievable.
Actually, as I remember, Roberts was well-known not to be an originalist of the Scalia / Thomas kind. For example, a self-proclaimed liberal on another Internet forum was relieved when he heard that Roberts had been nominated. Roberts was said to be a judicial minimalist which was supposed to mean that he doesn’t like sweeping decisions. It didn’t say much about his fidelity to the Constitution. Apparently, it was good enough for the GOP Establishment.
Not only correct and insghtful, but funny, too.
Young Americans for Freedom was attacked for coming out against O’Connor. Howard Phillips (of the Conservative Caucus) was attacked for testifying against Souter. Coulter was attacked fro opposing Roberts.
By conservatives.
They were right, and their critics were wrong.
I am proud to have opposed all three — and Stevens too.
That’s why Trump’s Supreme Court list was so important. There had been fear that we’d get Soutered, but the list reduced that anxiety significantly.