[WOSG]

The latter theory is unlikely; the court's ethos calls for signaling rather than rule-making. To the extent that the new chief justice is leading by example — and there is no doubt that he is in charge of the courtroom — he is offering a model of how to ask questions that are tightly phrased, penetrating and often the last thing a lawyer wants to hear. "Maybe it's because he has so much experience arguing before the court, but he seems to be able to zero in on the weakest point in a case," said Prof. Pamela S. Karlan of Stanford Law School, where she runs the Supreme Court Litigation Clinic.

ANother sign that Roberts is an awesome Supreme Court Justice. Thanks, President Bush for a gift that one hopes will be around for decades.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

ask questions that are tightly phrased, penetrating and often the last thing a lawyer wants to hear.

. . . Chief Justice Roberts is reliably said to be presiding over the justices' private after-argument conferences with a lighter hand, not watching the clock as closely and permitting more conversation.

That might account for the changed tone of the arguments, Ms. Brinkmann speculated. "If you know you'll be able to make your point in conference, you don't have to make it on the bench," she said.

If you ask hard questions of both sides and allow full debate in conference after formal court session - and if the justice who always jumped in with the first question is retired - you get a more collegial behavior on the bench, and undoubtedly also in conference.