[MikefromOhio]

he could pick and choose which cases he wanted to help out on.

And this indicates how his judicial philosophy will shape out HOW?

My God some people are paranoid here. I can understand being snakebitten, but this is really getting ridiculous. you know it is VERY disheartening to see Conservatives taking an LA TIMES story to heart and being a Conservative candidate for the Supreme Court over the head with it.

I have no more time to waste on this triviality. I can't WAIT to see the Hysteria when Roberts is confirmed.

[U.H. Conservative]

I don't know about Roberts but the cases I do pro bono are those whose outcome I favor. I ask myself little questions like "Should this even be litigated or is it a political question?" "If it should be litigated, do I want this side to be the winning side?" "What are the implications of this case down the road?"

Admittedly, I'm a new attorney. But one would think that a lawyer as well respected as Roberts would ask himself similar questions. And apparently the answer he came up with was that yes, the case belonged before the courts rather than the people and he was happy with what would fallout from victory. That says a lot about his judicial philosophy.