Posted on 08/11/2005 11:56:51 AM PDT by hinterlander
Supreme Court nominee Judge John Roberts, while serving as the head of Hogan & Hartson’s appellate division, spent about a dozen hours working on behalf of Playboy Entertainment Group in a case before the Supreme Court in 1999, his former colleague told HUMAN EVENTS.
(Excerpt) Read more at humaneventsonline.com ...
popsted = posted
And in three or fourYEARS, Roberts gave 12 HOURS of his time, to a colleague, to help prepare for this case.
Playboy is on cable, you have to pay extra for the channel, and what about this case is sticking in your craw...besides the fact that Scalia dissented?
The only "Principles" a Supreme Court Justice needs, are the ability to interpret the Constitution in the light intended by the authors...ever heard of it? Sometimes the threads on this "conservative" website baffle me. What part of Playboy's case do you think is counter to conservative constructionism?
It's true, if the teenage boys knew about this they would break into politics alright.
As I have posted elsehwere, he merely sat on a moot court panel just as many conservatives do as a matter of practice. He did not advocate the Playboy position. Sheesh!!
Here we go again...
Yes, I can; as well as an awful lot of hypocritical caviling by some FREEPERS.
Oh, for the love of Elvis... they really need to stop.
Just get to the vote already...Geez.
A donzen hours - - that's one day's work! Sheesh -- this is really picking at nits.....
I read back in 2003 that the law firm was very liberal, no telling who's on the list.
LOL, will be happening a lot more before it's over with...trust me.
His job was to play Scalia.....what a bunch of crapola stirring going on here!
Well, I bet doing the research was fun. Salacious, but fun.
Lemme see that part again.
I remember that ballot. Through the first couple readings of that item I thought marking "Yes" would protect the rights of homosexuals. On the third reading I realized that it was stripping them of protections and/or special treatment.
I wonder how many pro-homosexual people marked "Yes" because of the strange wording.
That is a very good point.
But I had a friend of a friend, who was the cousin of a guy who married a girl who did his eyebrows...geez.
>>the Playboy position
Chuckle.
I wonder how many Freepers out there are blessed with a career where they can simply pick and choose the job tasks assigned to them. For every "Playboy" case this guy helped on, I'm sure he also helped on an NRA case or some right-wing evangelical case. That's the nature of working for a law firm. Who wants a SCOTUS justice that will rule based on his whims or tastes, or preferences, or religious persuasion? That's not what they are there for.
>.picking at nits.....
That's what you call 'em, eh? Oh stop, enuff already, this from a poster named duckbutt, LOL!
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.