| Line 52: |
Line 52: |
| | ==United States Supreme Court== | | ==United States Supreme Court== |
| | [[Image:Roberts-Newsweek.jpg|145px|thumb|left]] | | [[Image:Roberts-Newsweek.jpg|145px|thumb|left]] |
| − | In his first two years on the [[U.S. Supreme Court]], Chief Justice Roberts has written only 24 opinions, mostly on uncontroversial or simple topics. In his first year, he sought unanimity in his decisions, leading him to dilute the strength of his opinions to satisfy everyone. For example, Chief Justice Roberts obtained unanimity on a controversial Solomon Amendment opinion by stretching to satisfy protesters against military recruiters:<ref>126 S. Ct. 1297, 1307 (2006).</ref> | + | In his first two years on the [[U.S. Supreme Court]], Chief Justice Roberts wrote only 24 opinions, mostly on uncontroversial or simple topics. In his first year, he sought unanimity in his decisions, leading him to dilute the strength of his opinions to satisfy everyone. For example, Chief Justice Roberts obtained unanimity on a controversial Solomon Amendment opinion by stretching to satisfy protesters against military recruiters:<ref>126 S. Ct. 1297, 1307 (2006).</ref> |
| | | | |
| | :The Solomon Amendment neither limits what law schools may say nor requires them to say anything. Law schools remain free under the statute to express whatever views they may have on the military's congressionally mandated employment policy, all the while retaining eligibility for federal funds. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 25 (Solicitor General acknowledging that law schools "could put signs on the bulletin board next to the door, they could engage in speech, they could help organize student protests"). As a general matter, the Solomon Amendment regulates conduct, not speech. It affects what law schools must do--afford equal access to military recruiters--not what they may or may not say. | | :The Solomon Amendment neither limits what law schools may say nor requires them to say anything. Law schools remain free under the statute to express whatever views they may have on the military's congressionally mandated employment policy, all the while retaining eligibility for federal funds. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 25 (Solicitor General acknowledging that law schools "could put signs on the bulletin board next to the door, they could engage in speech, they could help organize student protests"). As a general matter, the Solomon Amendment regulates conduct, not speech. It affects what law schools must do--afford equal access to military recruiters--not what they may or may not say. |
| | | | |
| | Similarly, in the campaign finance case, Roberts invalidated the restriction at issue but avoided establishing a bright-line rule in favor of political [[free speech]].<ref>FEC v. Wis. Right to Life, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2652 (2007).</ref> | | Similarly, in the campaign finance case, Roberts invalidated the restriction at issue but avoided establishing a bright-line rule in favor of political [[free speech]].<ref>FEC v. Wis. Right to Life, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 2652 (2007).</ref> |
| | + | |
| | + | == Copying from others == |
| | + | |
| | + | Roberts' writing style has a copy-and-paste superficiality about it, without much that is profound or seems original. He used the clever phrase "The way to end racial discrimination is to stop discriminating by race" without crediting the originator in that same case of that phrase, with better articulation, who was [[conservative]] [[Ninth Circuit]] Judge Carlos T. Bea. ''Compare'' ''Parents Involved in Cmty. Sch. v. Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1'', 551 U.S. 701, 748 (2007) (Roberts, C.J., for the Court) ("The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.") ''with'' ''Parents Involved in Cmty. Sch. v. Seattle Sch. Dist., No. 1'', 426 F.3d 1162, 1222 (9th Cir. 2005) (Bea, J., dissenting) ("The way to end racial discrimination is to stop discriminating by race."). |
| | | | |
| | == Record as an Appellate Judge == | | == Record as an Appellate Judge == |
| Line 63: |
Line 67: |
| | | | |
| | ==Health Problems== | | ==Health Problems== |
| − | Justice Roberts suffered a seizure on July 30, 2007, while at his vacation home in Port Clyde, [[Maine]] on Hupper Island. As a result of the seizure, he fell five to ten feet but suffered only minor scrapes. The fall occurred on a dock near his house and he was taken by private boat to the mainland. Doctors called the incident a benign idiopathic seizure which means there was no obvious physiological cause. Roberts suffered a similar seizure in 1993. | + | Justice Roberts suffered a seizure on July 30, 2007, while at his vacation home in Port Clyde, [[Maine]] on Hupper Island. As a result of the seizure, he fell five to ten feet but suffered only minor scrapes. The fall occurred on a dock near his house and he was taken by private boat to the mainland. Doctors called the incident a benign idiopathic seizure, which means there was no obvious physiological cause. Roberts suffered a similar seizure in 1993. |
| | ==See Also== | | ==See Also== |
| | *[[David Souter]] | | *[[David Souter]] |