It’s still too early. We just don’t have the patterns yet.

The Fourth Circuit could have vacated its ruling and I doubt the Supreme Court would have entertained [the Padilla case] at that point. But now it is very much alive in the Supreme Court and...

She has tried as hard and she can to get this difficult case right, and then she is confronted with a blatant violation of the rules. She has been careful and cautious, but probably is...

Right now it seems like the uncertainty would make senators more circumspect with Roberts.

That’s the nub of this issue. Whether there is a pattern of unilateral executive action without approval or consultation with the other two branches of government.

This means the issue of whether you can hold a citizen 3 1/2 years without charges will likely be unresolved, which is of great concern to many.

The Supreme Court has not directly faced the issue of whether ‘under God’ in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the First Amendment.

I don’t believe somebody like Tom DeLay is going to take any chances by way of his representation, and his reputation.

Specter is the key, and then it comes down to moderate Republicans and where we were in May.

This could expose Merck to substantial liabilities.

It’s a warning to the extent the White House cares or listens.

I don’t understand why that wasn’t used. Congress has clearly provided for what was going on. It seems to be that that procedure should have been followed.

One case does not a whole litigation strategy make.

It depends on how extensively she was involved in policy making in her five years in the White House.

very articulate but sort of reserved, almost kind of shy. And so I think he is a very likable sort of person.

His testimony could turn the jury against him.

The question is, can they have their cake and eat it too?

It seems to me that it would be relevant to a person’s case. I would expect the government to say that it is highly sensitive material, but we have legal mechanisms to balance the national...

The next question is the New England Journal flap. It seems to erode their credibility.

Most people predicted this but it wasn’t a forgone conclusion.

It seems the government is somewhat vindicated.

Negligence is much easier to prove; it’s the failure to exercise reasonable care. Willful misconduct is a much higher standard. You must intentionally misbehave. … The high standard would clearly discourage many suits.

The government is going to lose a very good ruling to avoid having this go before the Supreme Court.

I don’t think anybody today sees a reason for a filibuster, but they may after the hearing if the answers are troubling to them or they feel they haven’t gotten the answers to important questions.

The juries you draw in federal courts are more favorably inclined to institutional defendants.

It’s too soon to say Merck has momentum. Many people felt the Irvin case was a weak case to begin with. It was a short-term usage case.

It’s very difficult for Specter to thread the needle, because of all the obligations he has, … There’s substantial pressure on him because of the issue of reproductive freedom.

If he had not testified, it seems likely the jury would have come in in his favor.

By and large, the court is very deferential to this administration and others before it.

He anticipated an attack on him. I have a lot of respect for a judge who, presented with a difficult decision, admits it’s going to be tough. He has discharged his oath.

Sensenbrenner has been tough and stuck to his guns on past occasions. Maybe buying time will help.

It still doesn’t tell us where things stand.

Hopefully it won’t come to that, but maybe [BlackBerry users] should be mildly concerned.

It is a momentous decision, and they need more time to think about it.

He is saying as little as he needs to be confirmed and hasn’t made many mistakes that trouble a majority of senators whose votes he needs.

It’s probably the only thing that could prevent him from being confirmed right now, barring something coming from out of nowhere.

The tobacco industry has won some recent cases, and that Illinois case was a big one. But I think today’s ruling is certainly a big win for the plaintiffs. And I think the U.S. Supreme...

More and more people who have been injured or think they’ve been injured come forward. It takes on a life of its own.

We now have three federal appeals courts that have invalidated the federal partial birth abortion law. Most people predicted this, but it wasn’t a foregone conclusion.

It is a strong endorsement. The question is: How relevant is it? Someone who was on the 3 rd Circuit for a decade and a half and has done a good job is likely to...

If the government does not so tie him, this may weaken the case in the jury’s eyes.

His behavior is so erratic it’s hard to know what his testimony will mean for his case. But he has a right to testify.

It’s always unpredictable saying what the docket will look like in 10 years, … It could be high-tech, biotech. … If it were present-day issues, you’d have to take it case by case.

[The ground rules for asking and answering questions] are kind of ad hoc, … they invoke the history they need for the particular occasion.

The question is how high the liability shield needs to be. I think ‘willful misconduct’ is too high. We usually use some kind of negligence standard in these situations. It would be very unusual that...

[The chief justice’s personality is also important, legal analysts say.] He does have many of the qualities that potentially can make for a great and influential chief justice, … He has that great intellect, which...

It’s going to be very complex.

She’s trying to work a compromise that’s reasonable all the way around.

It sounds like a little bit of Russian roulette.

It was the intellectual elite of the conservative movement that expressed the most concern, not the religious conservatives or the business conservatives.