In the Watch for More file: That conversation between Oregon Senator Ron Wyden and now Chief Justice John Roberts.
In the decision released yesterday on Oregon's death with dignity (assisted suicide) law, Roberts wound up in the minority along with Justices Scalia and Thomas. The question: To what extent did that comes as a surprise to Wyden?
The reason for the question (as has been noted elsewhere) is that after Wyden and Roberts conversed last summer, in advance of the Senate vote on Roberts' confirmation, Wyden gave the impression that he had the impression Roberts would not vote to overturn the Oregon law.
An Oregonian story from August 10 noted, "Wyden said Roberts' comments on personal liberties and other issues of constitutional law left him hopeful that, if confirmed by the full Senate, Roberts would rule to protect Oregon's law allowing physician-assisted suicide. ... Roberts told Wyden that he would look closely at the legislative history of federal laws and would be careful not to strip states of powers they traditionally have held -- such as regulating the practice of medicine, Wyden said. 'You don't get the impression from how he answered that he'd let somebody stretch a sweeping statute like the Controlled Substances Act,' Wyden said."
As the current confirmation process continues, what does that suggest about the level of honesty involved - either the official players with each other, or some of them with us?