RE: Steve's not playing well with others... :-)

Let me get this straight: Roberts gives one decision that you don't like, so now you want to throw him off a cliff.

Well, no, actually I said there were three of which I was aware, but I'll admit I haven't followed every decision. But what difference does that make? How many "oopsies" should I give him? Five? Ten? Considering that every utterance of the SCOTUS seems to be with us for life, I'm not inclined to be very forgiving. In the game of avoiding the mangling of our constitution, we get no do-overs.

Rehnquist was a good conservative justice...

No doubt, that's why I gave Nixon credit for him. His "conservative" positions led him to act as an originalist many times, but not always. Nowhere near as often as Thomas or even Scalia, though.

Unlike you, I'm not going to throw somebody overboard because I disagree with one decision.

Um...it was at least three. I already said that.

Other than this one, what were the other two decisions???

So you were paying attention. What was all that stuff about one decision? I don't remember the case names, but I can look them up for you. In both cases, Roberts ruled like a Republican and not an originalist. They were both politically tinged decisions as well. I see no difference between a justice who makes liberal political decisions on the bench and one who makes so-called conservative political decisions. Both are judicial activism.