Both Sides Against Roberts

Would you believe that the left and the right have attacked Supreme Court nominee John Roberts for his past career moves? The abortion rights group NARAL aired a television ad implying that Roberts sympathizes with abortion clinic bombers because he wrote a brief on behalf of the government in favor of the right to protest abortion on behalf of a pro-life activist who bombed a clinic seven years later. This is like implying that you're guilty of accessory to murder for introducing O.J. Simpson and Nicole Brown to each other (or introducing Nicole to Colombian drug dealers, assuming you believe O.J. didn't do it and you buy his suggestion of who the "real killers" are). The ad was pulled after pro-choice Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter complained.

Meanwhile, a conservative group has withdrawn its support for Roberts because he represented a gay rights activist organization in the nineties. Apparently he did some pro bono work (mostly filing documents) for them in their case before the Supreme Court in 1996 - which they won - to get rid of a 1992 Colorado ballot initiative that allowed employers and landlords to discriminate against them on the basis of sexual orientation. The Court ruled six to three against the initiative.

That clinches it - I hope this dude gets confirmed. If he ticks off the left and the right at the same time, he must be a pretty fair-minded judge. True, we know virtually nothing about his judicial philosophy. But as David Souter proved, that might not be a bad thing. :-)