Posted on 08/03/2005 9:46:32 PM PDT by RWR8189
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 lawyer specializing in appellate work, the conservative Roberts helped represent the gay activists as part of his law firm's pro bono work. While he did not write the legal briefs or argue the case before the Supreme court, he was instrumental in reviewing the filings and preparing oral arguments, according to several lawyers intimately involved in the case.
The coalition won its case, 6-3, in what gay activists described at the time as the movement's most important legal victory. The three dissenting justices were those to whom Roberts is frequently likened for their conservative ideology -- Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
Roberts' role working on behalf of gay activists, whose cause is anathema to many conservatives, appears to illustrate his allegiance to the credo of the legal profession: to zealously represent the interests of the client, whoever it might be.
There is no other record of Roberts being involved in gay-rights cases that would suggest his position on such issues. He has stressed, however, that a client's views are not necessarily shared by the lawyer who argues on his or her behalf.
The lawyer who asked for his help on the case, Walter A. Smith Jr., then-head of the pro bono department at Hogan & Hartson, said Roberts didn't hesitate.
"He said, `Let's do it.' And it's illustrative of his open-mindedness, his fair-mindedness. He did a brilliant job," Smith said.
Roberts did not mention his work on the gay-rights case in his 67-page response to a Senate
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Awe Geez, not this $#!+ again ...
The question is, why did he take the case? I'm not going to read to much into it as yet, considering it's from the MSM. But if the facts are true, it does make me think Ann Coulter was on to something about him being a closet liberal.
Why would a conservative do work to advance leftism?
Then he's sure spent a lot of time clerking for conservative justices, and working in Republican administrations for much of his adult life hiding that fact.
This is it!!!! EXPLOSIVE!!!!! His firm was required to do pro bono work, and (choke!) did it! And as an employee of the firm, Roberts worked for a client!
I LOVE how the left uses the word GAY as a weapon to try to split GOP support for a judge who, when employed as a lawyer, worked as a lawyer. The hypocrisy of those who are always bitching about gays being stigmatized using gays to stigmatize is just beautiful.
next, he'll be bunking with Souter ... (/sarcasm)
So what?
This is bad news. The issue was too important to treat as a purely professional matter. Unless the story is badly wrong, we now have our first piece of genuinely disturbing news about Roberts. When the Rats praise a Republican, there's almost always a reason.
We still have to support the guy, and we can still hope that he'll be with us 90 percent of the time. But even a justice who is 10 percent wrong can do a lot of damage.
Don't worry, doing his job this once is enough for the Ann Coulter Was Right! crowd.
Exactly.
Oh my..... You mean to to;ll me that John Roberts did what he was told when his boss's told him to do some pro bono work.... I'm Shocked... Shocked I tell ya
This is nothing but an attempt by the left to discredit him among the Conservative Base
It's one thing to be hired to represent a client. It's another to do volunteer work for free. That infers you believe the client's cause is worthy.
Weren't there any conservative organizations that needed free legal representation?
I think it's a good thing that a lawyer defends zeaously his client. But I also think that lawyers should have ethics and not take cases they don't believe in. In my opinion, we all have to do what we can and use our abilities in all order of things to make this society a better place. Not doing so is lack of ethics.
That's exactly what it is. As you can see from some of the posts here, it is working.
Where do you get that from? The job had to be done, he did it.
Weren't there any conservative organizations that needed free legal representation?
Apparently not. I haven't seen anything stating he passed up working on some conservative group's case for this. And I imagine it is just what a good employee does--work on a pro bono job.
I am suspicious but not enough to reject roberts.
When it comes to this type of work, you do not HAVE to do something that objects your conscience. If he worked for a megafirm with hundreds of lawyers this does not mean much but do not underestimate the value of collaberation.
If this is an indication of how he would rule on homosexual marriage, then it is a dealbreaker. As a lawyer he should already KNOW that homosexuals already have access to cohabitation and estate planning. (even just making a deed "tenancy by the entireties" produces right now what homosexuals claim they don't have)
If this article is true, why are the Lefty 'RATS working so hard to keep Roberts from being confirmed? The MSM wants Republicans to start whining about Roberts so they can use Republicans whining about Roberts in their ads and on talk shows.
Maybe he believes gays shouldn't be discriminated against. I don't think that's some radical out there concept that means he's unfit for the court. I don't know the full details of the case so I can't say how I feel about this particular situation, but I feel better about him doing this than fighting FOR discrimination against gays. I can hate their agenda, fight against their trying to indoctrinate kids in schools, and all that, without calling for them to be fired just because they do something in their own homes. Oh, right, that makes me a liberal to some around here.
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.