Talk:John Roberts/Archive 1

message: A few resources:
*A Pictureat the Drudge Report Washington Post [Drudge stole the image with an inline link —Clarknova].
*AP story confirming his nomination. 
*There's a good reference on Roberts here, for whoever's editing the article right now. Adam Faanes 23:56, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Resources

message: Let's get ready to rumble!!! Now, fellows, let's try to keep in mind Point of View in this article. Neutralityyy please! I'm sure this will turn out to be a controversial decision, but let's try to be professionals with this article. Happy writing!<<Coburn_Pharr>> 00:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a question for the ages, Falcorian - if anyone ever does figure out a truly emotionally neutral way of separating those two viewpoints, I shall eat my hat. Kwh 08:48, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

text: Well, they're an abortion-advocacy group, so I say "anti-abortion," but I doubt we'd come to any consensus. --Badlydrawnjeff 14:46, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: POV

message: Did we really need to archive discussion so soon?  It's not as if the discussion page was overflowing...
:I put it back. --pile0nadestalk | contribs 01:53, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving already? 

message: Neutrality, how are the subheadings messing up your browser? And is it only in this article? What browser do you use? --pile0nadestalk | contribs 02:20, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subheadings 

message: Shouldn't this be moved to John G. Roberts, Jr.?  Postdlf 02:38, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punctuation 

message: Well, my quote from Sen. Kennedy got taken out while I was looking for a counterbalancing quote from the same source (his confirmation hearings in 2003).  What's the policy on quotes -- are they allowed?  Chip Unicorn 04:22, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes from other people 

message: One interesting way to get insight into Judge Roberts' judicial temperment might be looking at which schools he has drawn interns from. Anyone know how to find that out? -asx- 04:16, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who Were His Interns? 

message: * "In his role on the Court of Appeals, Roberts wrote the unanimous decision for a three-judge panel rejecting the civil rights claims brought on behalf of a 12-year-old girl who had been handcuffed, arrested and taken away by police for eating one French fry in the D.C. Metro" source.
* The section "Political and judicial views" discusses mostly cases he tried as an attorney. Unless there's something I'm unaware of, this seems relatively un-indicative of his own views since as a lawyer one tries the cases, and the sides on the cases, that one is hired to do. Cases he tried as an attorney are not inappropriate to the article, but belong in a different section. What would seem more relevant to this section would be some of the cases he presided over as a judge, and some information on his "Constitutional philosophy" so to speak. - DL
* True, BUT... attorneys do not need to accept every case offered to them. In fact, as morality (surprisingly) becomes more and more of an issue with attorneys, they turn down more and more cases; They simply refuse to argue in ways conflicting with their personal beliefs or for someone they believe to be guilty. To me, the fact that Roberts has even argued for such cases shows me one of two things: his moral guideline (or lack thereof) or his weak backbone (to support any idea people are willing to pay him to support). I believe this is what the author indended to show in this section.
* Statements about his moral stature and the state of his backbone are opinions. Let's present facts, in the appropriate context, and let readers decide for themselves what they think of Roberts' morals. As for choosing cases, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think a deputy solicitor general gets to choose his cases. As for private practice, again correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he was never a partner in the practice and I think that means he would have had to try the cases that the partners told him to. However, I think the changes made are good: dividing between "judicial opinions" and "arguments on behalf of clients" and specifying in the latter case who he was arguing for (President and Attorney General, and clients). Good work everyone! - DL
* I restored the paragraph about the authors of the Rust brief that anon deleted.  I think it's helpful for putting the brief in context and judging how well it represents Roberts's views on the subject.  Does anyone disagree?  TheGoodReverend 16:17, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Past Court Cases. 

message: Someone keeps removing my links to HHLaw.  Can this be justified?  Isn't it expected that such a valuable link be made available when it's known? User:Slonob
:I suspect the correct way to do this is create a wiki page for Hogan & Hartson that explains what they are/do and have a link from there to the H&H website.  In the Roberts article references should be wiki'd... Hogan & Hartson. --Paul 16:23, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hogan & Hartson Link 

message: By its nature, a nomination of a SCOTUS justice is significantly about the impact that his confirmation to the court will have.  Would a section such as the following be useful in this article?:
:==Potential immediate impact of Roberts replacing O'Connor==
::One immediate impact of the Roberts replacement of O'Connor may be in close cases where O'Connor joined the liberal justices in the majority, where Roberts may have joined the conservative justices instead.  Listed below are cases decided by a 5 to 4 vote, where O'Connor joined the liberal justices of the court in the majority:
*McCreary v. ACLU (2005)
*Jackson v. Birmingham Bd. of Education (2005)
*Tennessee v. Lane (2004)
*Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation v. EPA (2004)
*McConnell v. FEC (2003)
*Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
*Stenberg v. Carhart (2000)
*Davis v. Monroe (1999)
Of course, specific details about these decisions would be added as well. If not a section of this article, we could create a daughter article on the speculation on the impact on the direction of the court.   NoSeptember 13:37, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: IMHO, it's a bad idea.  Unless and until he's on the court, we don't actually know how he's going to vote on any issue.  (Remember Justice Souter.)  We should focus on what he's actually said and done. Chip Unicorn 14:15, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps appropriate would be a generalized comment that the nomination was a matter of particular interest because O'Connor was often the swing vote in close decisions, without listing specific cases.  This CNN story calls her that (and also reports that she "has dismissed the swing vote label"). JamesMLane 14:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with the swing vote label is that, in 5-4 decisions, any of the five majority justices are a potential swing vote because any one of them could swing to the other side.  TheGoodReverend 17:26, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, but none of the other 4 of the 5 in these decisions are being replaced right now.  The point is that if he votes differently to O'Conner on them, he'll cause a different outcome.  Cromis 19:29, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: O'Connor is considered a swing vote in that she's ideologically in the middle and so less predictable.  I think there've been several terms of the Court in which O'Connor wrote or joined in the fewest dissents, because her vote was most likely to be the decisive one. JamesMLane 22:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Speculation about the direction of the court

message: Can the photos at this government link be used? Are they public domain?  whicky1978 14:20, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
white house link
:I do believe so, as they were taken by a public employee during their work hours as part of their job. -Falcorian 15:53, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
:absolutely. i think. after all, if official white house portraits are in the public domain, why shouldn't these be? all paid for by our tax dollars.
::If someone has uploaded them, please provide a link.  There are some articles that could use these pictures, such as this one: Bush Supreme Court candidates  NoSeptember 14:43, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to TheGoodReverend for adding the picture to the article I mentioned above. NoSeptember 15:39, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

text: I uploaded the photo from the conference that you can see in the article.  Feel free to do the others. TheGoodReverend 12:42, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Can these photos be used

message: Does he own any pets? --Fastflam 14:48, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pets