No real surprise here, but with three terms now under his belt, it's becomingly painfully clear that the promises John Roberts made during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings to be an impartial umpire without an agenda were just lip service.
Particularly in the wake of the conservative triumvirate sledgehammer the high court unleashed upon this nation this past week - making clear that wealthy corporations can afford to wantonly destroy the environment (Exxon Valdez case), that poor political candidates oughta just give up (campaign finance reform) and somehow our neighborhoods are going to be safer by turning them into handgun-a-poloozas (DC handgun ban case) - I couldn't help but feel a sense of foreboding for any social justice issue that has the misfortune of making its way up the judicial system at the moment. (Read: whatever you do, don't bring an animal law case before this Court. )
And as it turned out, I wasn't the only person who was taking stock of Roberts' decisions since he took Rehnquist's seat. Here's a very thoughtful Chicago Tribune article on the subject.