Reply To: Michigan files supplemental brief replying to solicitor general

#17841
Robin Vander Wall
Robin Vander Wall
Admin

Personally, I’m not as concerned about Roberts’ participation because he will be constrained by the arguments he made in Smith v. Doe. And if he doesn’t hold to the essentials of that argument, his colleagues on the Court will be quick to point that out to him during oral. Roberts advanced the argument that the AK registry regime was not unconstitutional BECAUSE it did not impose undue burdens upon the people required to register. That was the persuasive, prevailing argument. So, his legal integrity will very likely force him into acknowledge his posture (and his legal arguments) during Smith v. Doe so as to avoid seeming duplicitous. Behind all the regalia of the bench are nine human beings who don’t find it any easier to argue with themselves than the next guy does.