[SeekAndFind]

RE: Freakin Roberts!!

Surprisingly, he was one of the six who sided with the majority.

I had expected the decision to be 5-4.

[Trump Girl Kit Cat]

I think Roberts was probably a decent HOWEVER the leak caused him to change sides and back the court!!

[TheTimeOfMan]

"No doubt, and this is a great ruling. But I'm not convinced it's really a matter of states' rights. If an unborn baby is really a human being, the protection of its life is a constitutional, hence federal, matter."

Indeed.

Right. To. Life.

[pepsi_junkie]

Surprisingly, he was one of the six who sided with the majority.

I still think it's more likely than not that he was the leaker (not to the press, I suspect, but to the white house hoping for leverage and THEY leaked it without his agreement) and if he sided with the majority than he knew the chance to get the ruling he wanted was lost and he made a political decision to sign his name to it for plausible deniability reasons.

[Petrosius]

Roberts joined with a concurring opinion upholding the Mississippi law (6-3). He did not join the other five justices in overturning Roe v. Wade (5-4).

[Cboldt]

Roberts is two faced. He agreed with the majority, then in what he called a concurring opinion, disagreed with the majority.

He’s a lunatic.

[Republican Wildcat]

Apparently two separate opinions. 5-4 overturn Roe, 6-3 to uphold the Mississippi law. The latter was what we were expecting, which would have been a major victory in the right direction, we said at the time.

[RoseofTexas]

So what is 5-4? He voted against overturning it! He sided with the evil baby killing rats. This speaks volumes...he is not a conservative! Never has been!

[DPMD]

He issued a separate concurring opinion, and much of it reads like a word salad, at least the portions highlighted in articles.