An L.A. Times story on SCOTUS nominee John Roberts' past work on behalf of gay-rights litigants is drawing a rather optimistic reaction from the gay commentariat. Even the unhinged left is still unable to find much bad to say. (The AMERICABlog link is from comments; the story link is broken -- although it appears that the underlying post tries to keep the despicable "Roberts or his family members must be gay" meme going.)
Towleroad calls the latest development "hopeful."
GayPatriot asks: "How can the Human Rights Campaign, Log Cabin Republicans and National Gay & Lesbian Socialist Task Force oppose him now?"
GayOrbit says "Not only did he help us out. He helped us out for FREE."
Roger Simon says: "It's not just because I support gay rights that I find this heartening. I like people who are able to 'go both ways' politically and are not so mired in the preconceptions of ideology that can't respond to the real world."
Ace Pryhill says "I await a righteously indignant mass email from the American Family Association condemning Judge Roberts for his assistance on Romer vs. Evans."
Bill and Kent say: "We are not going to get a nominee from the current President who will be 'pro-gay' or 'pro-choice'. It's just not going to happen. What we should all be looking for is a nominee who will be fair minded and open minded and see the side of other arguments and not be guided by some ideology that overrides that reasoning. ... Maybe he won't be so bad."
As Ace implied, some on the hard right, of course, are already flipping out, which is surely a good sign. God forbid we should have a Supreme Court justice who actually represents the vast swath of Americans in the middle! Plus, it's not exactly like the Republicans will oppose him, right?
But we should temper the optimism with caution. It is all but impossible to ascribe Roberts' work on behalf of clients to his own personal views. He himself has specifically drawn such a distinction. Still, it is a hopeful sign that his firm took on the Romer case as pro bono work.
UPDATE (more reaction): ND30 says the story reveals the "studied ignorance and outright mendacity" of pro-abortion groups.