Via Mark Coffey, the Washington Post has a story for us today that seems to serve no purpose other than to remind us that Roberts is a segregationist racist:
Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr. once urged a previous nominee, Sandra Day O'Connor, not to tell members of Congress how she might vote in cases likely to come before the court.
In a memo written on the eve of O'Connor's Senate confirmation hearings in 1981, Roberts -- then a senior aide to the attorney general helping prepare her -- told her that answering such questions would create an "appearance of impropriety" because her answers might be seen as prejudicing the outcome of cases not yet argued before the court on which she would serve.
This is, of course, news to absolutely no one. As we have covered extensively here, SCOTUS nominees have never answered those sorts of questions. So what is the point of this article? Well, if you scroll down a ways, you find some information that is seemingly unrelated to the story at the top, and it becomes apparent that the WaPo is simply trying to remind us that Roberts is anti-civil rights:
Just a year out of law school, Roberts was swiftly immersed in the administration's efforts to reverse desegregation policies conservatives saw as flawed, put certain civil rights matters beyond the reach of the Supreme Court and block a key voting rights bill approved by the House.
In 1982, for example, Roberts was asked by his boss, Kenneth W. Starr, counselor to the attorney general, to write a legal brief supporting the constitutionality of legislation that would limit federal court jurisdiction to decide cases involving public school prayer and busing to promote integration.
Again, this is not new, but it IS plenty slimy, as we have already covered here. And I guess, in the absence of covering anything that is really news, the WaPo is perfectly content to recycle old slime.
Comments