SCOTUS

According to archived documents of Roberts's various arguments and memoranda:

He defended, for instance, the constitutionality of proposed legislation to restrict the ability of federal courts to order busing to desegregate schools.

On other civil rights issues, he encouraged a cautious approach by courts and federal agencies in enforcing laws against discrimination.

<>The overall picture the article seems to paint is that he is cautious when it comes to extending rulings beyong the strict letter of federal law. This seems reasonable, perhaps even like the sort of judge one (any one, of any political leaning) would want on the Supreme Court. However, a) this is the slant of the article, based mostly on paraphrased excerpts from documents, not the documents themselves, so I'd much rather wait and make the judgement on my own, thanks and b) this also seems like a potentially dangerous way to simply rationalize things like, oh, I don't know, not wanting to enforce laws against discrimination!