Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Roberts worked for gay rights activists
The Baltimore Sun ^ | 8/4/05 | Richard Serrano

Posted on 08/04/2005 7:24:32 AM PDT by conserv13

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 private lawyer in Washington specializing in appellate work, Roberts helped represent the gay activists as part of his pro bono work at his law firm. He did not write the legal briefs or argue the case before the high court; he was instrumental in reviewing the filings and preparing oral arguments, several lawyers intimately involved in the case said.

(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gay; homosexualagenda; johnroberts; roberts; romervevans; scotus; stupidsubject; ussc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-359 next last
To: You Dirty Rats

LOL

thats already begun LOL


51 posted on 08/04/2005 7:57:52 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Coulter is part of the "tin-foil" group?

And does the fact that a conservative person is apprehensive about a Supreme Court nominee in light of the many times so-called "conservative" candidates have turned out to be judicial activists make them a "tin-foil" individual?

I hardly think so.

I don't like the fact that Roberts worked for the Lavender Mafia. But there are other issues to consider also and the circumstances involved in this situation. Time and questioning hopefully will reveal whether Roberts is what he has been presented as, or another Souter.

In the meantime, the President isn't God and he doesn't speak with Divine Revelation. Its possible to question his actions and choices and still be a good conservative and Republican and basically support him.


52 posted on 08/04/2005 7:57:54 AM PDT by ZULU (Fear the government which fears your guns. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

I am a Coulter fan, but do not agree with her on this subject. I can disagree with someone on some things,but still not be a sarcastic,nasty person to those I do not always see eye to eye with. You sound to me like you have an Ann Coulter fixation. you are not helping your argument.


53 posted on 08/04/2005 7:57:55 AM PDT by samantha ("Cheer up the grownups are in charge")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: trebb

How can you call this a hit piece? A hit piece would be about John Roberts barricading himself in front of an abortion clinic, not helping the gay lobby. This is a love letter to the left - "don't worry, it's all good".


54 posted on 08/04/2005 7:58:27 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats; All

I advise not starting a I'm never voting Republican again drinking game..


55 posted on 08/04/2005 7:58:53 AM PDT by KevinDavis (the space/future belongs to the eagles, the earth/past to the groundhogs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
this site is headed for a few people to have meltdowns

I think you're right and as a person who got caught up in the Schiavo emotion, I think I'll take a pass this time.

btw, I think Roberts is going to be an excellent Supreme Court justice and that Coulter was out to lunch on her articles on this topic.

56 posted on 08/04/2005 7:58:59 AM PDT by proud American in Canada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Do you think a conservative Justice should support Romer?


57 posted on 08/04/2005 7:59:02 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

honestly, I think that you are just looking for shit to leave the GOP or something.

Just say it, you won't vote for the GOP again.

you know you want too.

As I have said, I think what the man has said and what I have read about him. So he did pro-bono work. So what. That probably means he is able to separate his personal feelings for that of work for a client.

that probably also means that he can separate his personal poliical leanings and will interpret the Constitution the way it was meant.

It probably DOESN'T mean that he is a Conservative Judicial activist. I can handle that. Coulter fans cannot, because if it isn't an eye for an eye with that crowd, then it's wrong.

I am REALLY going to laugh when he gets confirmed. Hell, I might even take the day off of work so I can laugh at people going into histrionics all day on FR.


58 posted on 08/04/2005 8:00:20 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: jtminton
I see from a number of the posts on this thread that the left's smear tactic campaign is working.

Right you are. I thought we were smarter than that.

59 posted on 08/04/2005 8:00:27 AM PDT by Bahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

in this case, coulter is.

Someone needs to slip her a donut or something.


60 posted on 08/04/2005 8:00:55 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

Mike - your immature attitude is only further proof you have nothing to back up your assertion. Without a paper trail demonstrating a conservative philosophy, why are you so adamant that it will turn out that way?


61 posted on 08/04/2005 8:01:28 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: samantha

nope.

believe me I have NO Ann coulter fascination.

However, some individuals on here will take ANY Roberts thread and say "Ann coulter was right" over and over again.

it's annoying.


62 posted on 08/04/2005 8:01:41 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
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.
63 posted on 08/04/2005 8:01:45 AM PDT by Antoninus (Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

no....

and I would bet that he wouldn't if he were a justice, however he was a lawyer at the time, not a justice.


64 posted on 08/04/2005 8:03:04 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: proud American in Canada

Yeah I think so too.

If she is snakebitten, she could just admit it instead of writing an throughly unreadable article.


65 posted on 08/04/2005 8:03:42 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
personally, the guy is able to put aside his personal feelings for a client.

Pro-bono indicates that he volunteered to work on this case. What kind of lawyer seeks out a sodomy "rights" case to work on for free? You're mischaracterizing this, I'm afraid.
66 posted on 08/04/2005 8:04:12 AM PDT by Antoninus (Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
your immature attitude is only further proof you have nothing to back up your assertion.

Because it doesn't matter what I write, you are going to go on believing whatever and be wrong about it, so I am going to have a little fun with it.
67 posted on 08/04/2005 8:04:28 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: lady lawyer

"The problem is, that the Supreme Court invented a constitutional right to homosexual sodomy."

That's not what the case they're talking about was about.


68 posted on 08/04/2005 8:04:49 AM PDT by republicofdavis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: conserv13; All

Has anybody stopped to consider that this all happened 10 years ago? How many people here would stand by everything they did ten years ago?

Get a grip, folks.


69 posted on 08/04/2005 8:05:06 AM PDT by jtminton (Help stop second hand rap!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah; Ann Coulter; Revelation 911; The Grammarian; SpookBrat; Alamo-Girl; P-Marlowe; ...
Ann Coulter might just prove to be a great prognosticator.

She objects to Roberts due to his unknown record....says we've allowed the entire liberal wing under Republican presidents to slip in in this exact same fashion.

Hmmmmmm......

Hope she's wrong. I don't think there's any stopping these dominoes from falling.
70 posted on 08/04/2005 8:05:08 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

whatever man...

I am selling Prozac for cheap. get it now before the Senate hearings.


71 posted on 08/04/2005 8:05:11 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: jtminton
Get a grip, folks.

FAT chance of that happening by Christmas....
72 posted on 08/04/2005 8:05:55 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I don't think there's any stopping these dominoes from falling.

Hey--you know as well as I do the future history of this planet. It's gonna happen. Just be thankful it's all under control.

73 posted on 08/04/2005 8:07:27 AM PDT by ShadowAce (Linux -- The Ultimate Windows Service Pack)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

I don't know why anyone would think that because a lawyer has a certain client in his career, or takes any certain advocacy position, that that provides any indication regarding his future judicial philosophy.

(By the way, I agree whole-heartedly with your screen name)


74 posted on 08/04/2005 8:08:02 AM PDT by republicofdavis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
So, if he did the pro bono work because he believed that Romer was a critical case that must be decided in favor of speacial rights for a class of folks, that should give one pause for thought, no?

I'm not an alarmist but I wasn't born yesterday either. Souter, Stephens and Kennedy were given to us by good Republican Presidents which means appointing Justices to the SCOTUS is a very tricky business.

Being concerned because Dubya appointed somebody with no appellate record to speak of is not abnormal, it logically follow the past 30 years of appointment history.

75 posted on 08/04/2005 8:08:08 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
Mike, you're hysterical now. You can't take it when someone disagrees with you, we all know that, but your version of the Republican party falls somewhere between John McCain and Arlen Specter.
76 posted on 08/04/2005 8:08:08 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: xzins
/Theistic (Billions of Years) Jesuit Evolutionists....

'AC' is not only beautiful.....

77 posted on 08/04/2005 8:09:33 AM PDT by maestro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

i choose not to be snakebitten.

besides that fact, gay rights aren't my only qualifier.

This judge is ardently pro-life for example...


78 posted on 08/04/2005 8:09:34 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: republicofdavis
That's not what the case they're talking about was about.

Romer gutted Bowers de facto.

79 posted on 08/04/2005 8:09:55 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
but your version of the Republican party falls somewhere between John McCain and Arlen Specter.

ohh yeah you got me there!! LOL!!!!! Is that REALLY all you can come up with? As I said, the meltdown as begun. this is gonna be great!!!!
80 posted on 08/04/2005 8:10:28 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

It doesn't matter what you write because you offer no substance, just a lot of insecurity over this choice. You don't want to be proven wrong, so you tear down anyone who disagrees with you. It's really sad that you can't hold a conversation without acting like the village bozo.


81 posted on 08/04/2005 8:10:38 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
I don't necessarily agree with Coulter on this subject, but her statements regarding caution are well taken.

We are talking about an individual who will sit on that Court for twenty or more years.

We have been burned badly before.

So far, I like Roberts and think he will be a good candidate, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be watching things anyway.

I hope we all do.

We can expect surreptitious attacks from the left as well as genuine concerns expressed by legitimate conservatives on this appointment. It may not be possible to distinguish easily between the two, so we should be alert and cautious about accusations against this candidate.
82 posted on 08/04/2005 8:11:16 AM PDT by ZULU (Fear the government which fears your guns. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: TheBigB; All
I searched for 'Roberts' and 'gay' and didn't see it. Sorry.

I'm not being a troll here, I just thought this was relevant.

83 posted on 08/04/2005 8:11:27 AM PDT by conserv13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
It doesn't matter what you write because you offer no substance, just a lot of insecurity over this choice.

Guess what, neither did Ann. Neither has anyone but your Friend and mine, the LA TIMES. Interesting bedfellows I tell you what.

PROZAC 2 FOR 1 SALE!!!
84 posted on 08/04/2005 8:11:38 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: lady lawyer; All

Woaaaa... If this is true, I don't like this one bit! :(


85 posted on 08/04/2005 8:11:46 AM PDT by ElPatriota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
This judge is ardently pro-life for example...

Maybe he'll take some pro-bono work for NARAL, too, since he can separate his beliefs from his career.

86 posted on 08/04/2005 8:12:01 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq; little jeremiah; All

Agreed. They were nearly hysterical pieces, so much so that I wondered if she really believed what she was saying.

And as you both have pointed out, he was working as a lawyer in a law firm. I don't think his work on this case is a real indication of how he would vote in any particular case that would cross his desk in the future.

And I say that as a trained lawyer (though I've never practiced). If someone came to me needing help, I would want to help them. It is the nature of the job, and of our legal system.

For example, defense attorneys might think their client is guilty of murder (and in fact, defense attorneys don't even want to know if their client is actually guilty, because if they do they can't put him on the stand in his own defense), but they will use all their training to exonerate him.

It's the way the system works.


87 posted on 08/04/2005 8:12:04 AM PDT by proud American in Canada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce

Hi, SA. I agree.


88 posted on 08/04/2005 8:12:19 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq

It is annoying, but being mean and laughing at people does not help. I think he is an excellent candidate, and is crafty and smart, maybe even cunning all done with a very happy smile on his face. He is Conservative and he has been a Lawyer for many years, and sometimes your bosses make you clean up crap. He has earned his Appointment and his Supreme Ct Judge Robes. I would caution everyone to hold your fire for now because the media know how to manipulate and get Conservatives at each other's throats.


89 posted on 08/04/2005 8:12:20 AM PDT by samantha ("Cheer up the grownups are in charge")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

I agree with that.

I also agree with being cautious.

but you can be OVERLY cautious as well.

Kind of like the sports analogy "playing not to win, but not to lose".


90 posted on 08/04/2005 8:12:52 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: biblewonk

Lots of entertainment in this thread. Thanks for the ping.


91 posted on 08/04/2005 8:12:53 AM PDT by newgeezer (Iowan since 1960. First-generation city boy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

Romer is simply more of the same ole same ole, taking cultural issues out of the public square and letting the gods on the becnch decide. I hope to hell Roberts doesn't have that mindset."

I see no problem with an attorney advocating a position under the rules of the game at the time he's playing. That has no bearing on what his judicial philosophy will be. Would we have expected him to say, so that he would pass muster today, "I can't help you because I believe that the Constituition should be interpreted in X fashion, even though everyone else is interpreting it in Y fashion?" I would say that probably would not be a very good lawyer.


92 posted on 08/04/2005 8:12:53 AM PDT by republicofdavis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
I didn't say it was an only qualifier, just something to be considered. I happen to think the constitution protects the unborn, a radical view not even Scalia agrees with admittedly. But that's another story.

I'm pretty sure Roberts is a vote to overturn major parts of Roe and Doe v Bolton but I'm not sure because there is no record. So asking questions and being dubious is OK by me.

In fact, I see nothing wrong with either side asking potential justices about their personal morality and if and how it would affect their interpretation of constitutional law. I'm especially interested in the radical secualar humanist derivation of morality as it pertains to law and the constitution.

93 posted on 08/04/2005 8:15:03 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
I'm especially interested in the radical secualar humanist derivation of morality as it pertains to law and the constitution.

Heh. Well I am pretty sure we don't have that here....
94 posted on 08/04/2005 8:16:05 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

"We know he supports Roe v. Wade as precedent and "settled law"."

No we don't. We know he said something along those lines as part of the tapdance that all Supreme Court nominees must engage in to lessen the probability of a nuclear battle.

"We know he did pro bono work for the gay lobby."

We know very little factually on this issue, and even if he did, it doesn't necessarily mean anything.

"We know he's "open-minded"."

Wow. That's pretty damning. What's the context of that "quote?"


95 posted on 08/04/2005 8:17:07 AM PDT by republicofdavis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: samantha
I would caution everyone to hold your fire for now because the media know how to manipulate and get Conservatives at each other's throats.

yes they do. it's worked too unfortunately. Ann Coulter included, in this case.
96 posted on 08/04/2005 8:17:19 AM PDT by MikefromOhio (When Judge Roberts is confirmed, FR will be EXTREMELY funny that day...Get your PROZAC here!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: republicofdavis

I think attorneys should do their job period, just like everybody else. It's the pro bono thing that bothers me a bit. Lawyers, I would think as a rule (but I could be wrong here), only accept pro bono constitutional cases when they agree with the desired outcome. No?


97 posted on 08/04/2005 8:17:19 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: jtminton
How many people here would stand by everything they did ten years ago?

Good point, and that probably prevents a lot of good people from considering public service.

98 posted on 08/04/2005 8:18:15 AM PDT by proud American in Canada
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07

Scalia thinks the constitution doesn't protect the lives of the unborn?


99 posted on 08/04/2005 8:18:46 AM PDT by little jeremiah (A vitiated state of morals, a corrupted public conscience, are incompatible with freedom. P. Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: MikeinIraq
Heh. Well I am pretty sure we don't have that here....

LOL, certainly not but I'd pay an admission to fee to hear the answer to that question from the likes of Justice Ginsburg.

100 posted on 08/04/2005 8:18:49 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 351-359 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson