IF Roberts supported Romer he should not have been appointed to the court by a conservative President. 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.
believe what you want to believe...
personally, the guy is able to put aside his personal feelings for a client. That also means he probably puts aside his political leanings for the Constitution.
One generally translates to the other. It certainly did in the cases of Thomas and Scalia.
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.