A clearer picture of the Supreme Court debate

Ok. So I just read this story about Democrats' fears that Roberts "may be inclined to support state or local interests on issues from civil rights to pollution control if confirmed to the high court."

The case involves one in which Roberts ruled against an endangered toad in San Diego, siding instead with a construction company that had the support of the local government.

The problem is that Sen. Kennedy et al. are worried about a potential judge siding with local government against TOADS, but not about five sitting judges siding with local government against PEOPLE (a la Kelo v. New London).

The story offers a clearer picture not of Roberts' judicial philosophy, but of the mindset of those opposing him in the Senate.