The Recusable Roberts?

Did Supreme nominee Roberts say he would recuse himself from abortion cases? That's what Dick Durbin alleges was said, and fJonathan Turley, the LAT op/ed writer who spilled the beans, stands by the story.

Here's a comment from The Brothers Judd site that clarifies. Click through on the link to more clarification from Althouse:

Apparently Justice Roberts said that he would recuse himself if the law required him to rule in a way such that the act of ruling would be considered by his church as the commission of an immoral act. That's quite a bit different from the mess of pottage of a summary that we see in the Times, but what can you expect from such a tabloid?

A bit more discussion here.

Ann's conclusion:

I think Roberts, during the pause, thought this through and fixed on the key point, which was Scalia's point: a ruling in favor of abortion rights is not an immoral ruling, even if abortions are immoral. It is only if he becomes "part of the machinery" -- as is the case with the death penalty -- that the immoral act of another is the judge's own immorality.

Thus, Roberts' answer will not mean that he will need to recuse himself in abortion cases.

It's impossible to see inside another's mind, but the Scalia connection is a valuable discernment tool. Watch for broad MSM extreme interpretation of the matter.