What is your opinion of John G. Roberts?

[Giant Saguaro]

So far favorable.

Reminded me a bit of Reagan in how he sizes things up and with some of his anicdotes. My best guess is he's a restrained conservative - I'd be surprised if Bush would appoint a Souter.

[Giant Saguaro]

Apparently, Roberts rejected the idea of finding precedent in foreign law, and that is very good. That position eases one of my major concerns. I believe this is the baseline of Kennedy's absurd comments that Roberts has too narrow a view of the Constitution.

[Giant Saguaro]

We can hope, yes. But for conservatives, there have never been many good surprises on that court. Plenty of bad ones, but not many good ones.

Yes, many of the Republican appointees in the past fifty years haven't turned out as expected: Souter, Stevens, Blackmun, Brennan, Harlan, and Warren all stand out.

The nominations of Democratic Presidents, on the other hand, haven't held any major surprises in the past half-century, with the possible exception of Byron White.

Apparently, Roberts rejected the idea of finding precedent in foreign law, and that is very good.

I don't think that any jurist in the mainstream advocates finding precedent in foreign law (with the exception of English common law).

Kennedy's controversial reference to foreign law in Lawrence v. Texas was only to rebut the suggestion in Bowers v. Hardwick that "Decisions of individuals relating to homosexual conduct have been subject to state intervention throughout the history of Western civilization." Kennedy did not find precedent in foreign law; rather, he referred to foreign law to disprove the allegation that homosexual conduct was deemed illegal "throughout the history of Western civilization."

Well, the death penalty case specifically referenced foreign law as precedent, I think, and he has specifically mentioned foreign law elsewhere - basis for a decision or not, it still is a concern.

Ginsburg and Stevens worry me a lot more than Kennedy, actually.