More about John G. Roberts.

[MrFun]

Here is an interesting article about this particular Republican.

John G. Roberts and His Past Work


So after reading the linked article, what does anyone make of him in light of this information?

I'm still kind of malleable.

[MrFun]

Don't overwhelm my thread with so many responses all at once, people.

[Japher]

I don't know about him, but his boy sure can dance

[Sava]

I don't care if the guy cured cancer. If he's Bush's guy, he's bad.

[DanS]

This is typical law firm pro bono work. Law firms aren't ideological, or at least shouldn't be ideological. If they were, how could they defend their clients well? Law firms can even work both sides of a legal issue. So Roberts being part of the team for this is no reflection on his ideology.

[DRoseDARs]

I agree that pro bono work is neither here nor there. The only thing that matters is the documents the WH is refusing to turn over for Senate evaluation on this guy. THOSE are what will reflect on his ideology...

[Dr Strangelove]

Personally I don't care, but Fred Phelps is livid.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by DanS
This is typical law firm pro bono work. Law firms aren't ideological, or at least shouldn't be ideological. If they were, how could they defend their clients well? Law firms can even work both sides of a legal issue. So Roberts being part of the team for this is no reflection on his ideology.

So he doesn't care for equal rights of all American citizens, but he will still do work that supports equal rights of all American citizens because it's merely part of his job.

[DanS]

If he didn't care for equal rights for all Americans, that phrasing would be correct. As an attorney in private practice, he has an ethical obligation to do pro bono work and to represent his pro bono clients to the best of his ability.

In this case, the law firm of which he was a part probably staked out this legal territory for pro bono work. He was probably brought in to help because he had expertise in this particular area. That being the facts for our purposes here, he had an obligation to argue the case to the best of his ability, no matter his ideology.